Memoir upon the formation of a deaf variety of the human race [microform]

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

MEMOIR

UPON THE FORMATION OF A DEAR VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE.

BY

ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL

99 A—BELL——1

UPON THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE.

4 PAPER PRESENTED TO THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AT NEW HAVEN, NOVEMBER 13, 1683,

-

IntRopuctorY Remarks.

The influence of selection in modifying our breeds of domestic animals is most marked, and it
is reasonable to suppose that if we could apply selection to the human race we could also produce
modifications or varieties of men.

But how can we ascertain the susceptibility of the human race to variation produced by selec-
tion? We cannot dictate to men and women whom they shall marry, and natural selection no
longer influences mankind to any great extent.

We can see around us everywhere evidences of the transmission by heredity of characteristics,
both desirable and undesirable, but at first sight no general selective influence appears'tu be at
work to bring about the union in marriage of persons possessing the same congenital peculiarities.
On the contrary, sexual attractior often appears to operate after the manner of magnetical attrac-
tion—“ unlike poles attract, like poles repel.” Strong, vigorous, and robust men naturally feel
a tenderness for weak, delicate, and fragile women, and are generally repelled by physical strength
and masculine traits in one of the opposite sex. Even in such characteristics as the color of the
hair and eyes, itjaften appears that unlikes attract.

Certain diseases are known to be liable to transmission by heredity. But we do not find epi-
leptics marrying epileptics, or consumptives knowingly marrying consumptives. Even though
persons afflicted with the same hereditary disease were to intermarry for a number of successive
generations, it i@oubtful whether any permanent variety of the race could be formed in this way,
for the increased tendency to disease inherited by the offspring would probably cause a greater
tendency to premature death and ultimately occasion the extinction of the variety.

On the other hand, it is reasonable to suppose that the continuous intermarriage of persons
possessing congenital defects not associated with diminished vitality or vigor of constitution would
result after a number of generations in the production of a vigorous but defective variety of the
race. For instance, the absence of coloring matter from the skin and hair is a defect occasionally
found among human beings, and we may learn from the success of attempts to propagate Albinism
among animals, that we would probably produce a pink-eyed, white-haired variety of the human
race by causing Albinos to marry one another; but this is only speculation. We cannot control
the marriages of men as we can the breeding of animals, and at first sight there seems to be no
way of ascertaining how far human beings are susceptible of variation by selection.

Cs Bren Mninarmmesm Neamt =a canna nt sabes asia ait AEE EAA ALL LLL LLL ELL ALLL LOLOL LLANE ALLAN
— -

4 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENOES.

Such a conclusion, however, would be incorrect; and I desire to direct attention to the fact
that in this country deaf-mutes marry deaf-mutes.

An examination of the records of some of our institutions for the deaf and dumb reveals the
fact that such marriages are not the exception, but the rule. For the last fifty years there has been
some selective influence at work which has caused, and is still causing, the continuous selection of
the deaf by the deaf in marriage.

If the laws of heredity that are known to hold in the case of animals also apply to man, the
intermarriage of congenital deaf-mutes through a number of successive generations should result
in the formation of a deaf variety of the human race.

On the other hand, if it can be shown that congenitally deaf persons marry one another
without any greater liability to the production of deaf offspring than is ‘to be found among the
people at large, then it will be-evident that we cannot safely apply to man the deductions that
have been drawn from experiments upon animals.

There are good grounds for the belief that a thorough investigation of the marriages o1 the
deaf and the influence of these marriages upon the offspring will afford a solution of the problem,
“To what extent is the human race susceptible of variation by selection ?”

Although the statistics I have been able to collect are very incomplete, I have ventured to
bring the subject to the attention of the Academy, in the hope that the publication of the results
8o far obtained may lead to the completion of the statistics,

8
eis @

as

CHAPTER I.

UPON THE MATERIALS FOR THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE AT
PRESENT EXISTING IN AMERICA. :

The first difficulty encountered in the inquiry is that the published reports of our institutions
for the deaf and dumb contain very little information bearing upon the subject, but, judging from
the questions that are asked of the parents or guardians of the pupils, there must be among the
unpublished records of our institutions an immense collection of valuable facts relating to heredity
at present inaccessible to the public. Many of the reports of the institutions contain little more
of interest in this connection than a catalogue of the pupils. The mere lists of names, however,
become of value by directing attention to the fact that among the pupils who have been admitted
to many of our institutions, numerous groups of deaf-mutes are to be found who have the same
surname.

No one would be surprised by the moderate recurrence of such common names as Smith” or
“Brown” or “Johnson”—as the recurrences might be accidental, and have no other significance
than to indicate the prevalence of these names in the community at large. But can it be acci-
dental that there should have been admitted into one institution eleven deaf-mutes of the name of
“Lovejoy,” seven of the name of “Derby,” and six of the name of Mayhew.” What interpreta-
tion shall we place upon the fact that groups of deaf-mutes are to be found having such names as
“Blizzard,” “ Fahy,” “ Hulett,” ‘“Closson,” “ Brasher,” “‘Copher,” “Gortschalg,” &c.? Such names
are by no means common in the community at large, and the inference is irresistible that in many
cases the recurrences indicate blood-relationship among the pupils.

An examination of a number of institution reports shows that these recurrences are altogether
too numerous to be entirely accidental, and we are forced to conclude, (1) that deafness runs in
certain families, (2) that these families are very numerous, and (3) that they are to be found in all
parts of tho United States. rie

The following list of recurring surnames, taken from the 1877 report of the American Asylum
for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb (Hartford, Conn.), will show how numerous these recur-

rences are among the pupils of our older institutions :
5

wa RR LE TT A | TT

6 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

TABLE I.—Recurrence of surnames among 2,106 pupils admitted between the years 1817 and 1877.
American Asylum for the education of deaf-mutes, Hartford, Conn.

Names occurring 25 times: Smith.
Names occurring 20 times: Allen.
Names occurring 17 times: Brown.
Names occurring 13 times: Campbell, Davis.
Names occurring 12 times: White.
Names occorring 11 times; Clarke, Johnson, Lovejoy.
Names occurrir,, 10 times; Small.
Names occurrn:g 9 times: Fuller, Green, West, Williams, Wood.
Names occurring 8 times: Bailey, Bartlett, Perkins, Richardson, Rogers, Wright.
Names occurring 7 times: Derby, Jack, Marsh, Martin, Merrill, Thomas.
Names occurring 6 times: Berry, Butler, Hawley, Marshall, Mayhew, Morse, O’Brien, Rowe, Rus-
seli, Stevens, Swett, Taylor, Tripp.
Names occurring 5 times: Andrews, Ball, Barnard, Blizzard, Chapman, Cook, Curtis, Dennison,
Fisk, French, Holmes, Howe, Jackson, Kimball, Meacham, New-
combe, Packer, Parker, Pease, Porter, Reed, Siocum, Sullivan, Til-
ton, Webster, Wilson, Young.
Names occurring 4 times: Baker, Bennett, Bigelow, Bishop, Burbee, Chandler, Ellis, Emerson, i
Fahy, Fisher, Foster, Gilbert, Hammond, Hill, Holt, Hulett, Hull,
Jellison, Jones, Kendall, Kennedy, Ladd, Luce, Marr, Mayberry,
Miller, Morgan, O'Neill, Page, Parsons, Prior, Quinn, Robbins,
Ryan, Scovell, Stone, Strong, Stuart, Thompson, Turner, Wake
fiold, Ward, Welch, Wells, Wiswell,
Names occurring 3 times: Abbott, Acheson, Allard, Atkins, Badger, Baldwin, Barnes, Barrett,
Blakely, Bliss, Boardwin, Briggs, Bruce, Burnham, Cantlon, Car-
penter, Carter, Clossen, Clough, Cobb, Cummins, Daniels, Dennison,
Drown, Dudley, Edwards, Fish, Frank, Goodrich, Gray, Haley,
Haskell, Holden, Hunter, Ingraham, Jordan, Lafferty, Lainbert,
Larabee, Livingston, Lombard, Lyman, Macomber, Mahoney, Mann, '
McCarty, Mitchell, Moore, Morrison, Mowry, Murphy, Nelson, New- )
ton, Noyes, Osgood, Palmer, Perry, Platt, Pratt, Prescott, Randall,
Reynolds, Robertson, Sage, Sawyer, Sherman, Sloane, Stebbins,
Stevenson, Taft, Titcombe, Town, Trask, Wardman, Watson,
Wentworth, Wheeler, Whitcomb, Wilkins, Winslow, Woodward.
Names occurring 2 times: These are too numerous to be quoted here, There ure two hundred and
fourteen of them,

ae

eS a
yo pee a re ee Se
,

The following tables show that the pupils referred to above constitute more than 63 per cent.
of the total number of pupils admitted:

TABLE II.—Recurrence of surnames among the pupils of the American Asylum for deaf-mutes, Hart-

ford, Corn, (1877 Report.)
No. of pupils

represented,

TOA MAN OBOE TLENGs Vos 6s: 0 cc ceubeses ceced Sino bes20 4 c0bise ted Pewee bded landed seeeks 764
MEM TIGINEROCOLY PLUNGE: <6 6-c50c06 odccicedaedideciees 03: 960 dss 00es ob54sdobdersubeabidwede 428
SL TBNION OCCULT SCL GS sos siisicccts ceWessiiaded Ceedecccds css cosbercetensacbeneeseueeee 243
MERIT COCUE “MNDLUNOWs 66.05 ¢- on 5.6.6 c6ae De bSud non5.05 CbNegbOs.du 0585.0 buclubsclbaNseeenieeee 180
PT TIBOR COOOL DO GUON aii ss cctcceeys Hinwasd OUSd de e0lce cede succeed ¥caeeaneeedteee- bans 135
TATA OR OOO DHDONs «6.5 ocissab cneteabcwavacbes. os bude isietes neces cons sunt dieabpeedhe 78
GBIIOE COGN Te ROS 6 oink ca end cdots cxdicceas mecca eceepvsneeneedecees eehneyeene 42
CAIRNE COOCUE. (SUID s cow vcssldusyeceewesbs nbbeibcb und esse gadisGas bks.c0Urabeeas cane 43

5 names occur 9 times.......... 022-2. cee eee ee eee cece ee tween aio eades dersaeebeeosas’ 45
LURID ONCHIS AOD Wisis-ckc cncshdarnrncercvsiersacevediaeegessbaorebiehcoeebs venent 10
OiBMON OOCNE UL MNON cies cis.cesbaseede-te use tis cptavn bes sbed doeeavarebnebiisaes Keane 33
ETS OCCT TS HONS isis Sas vid sickawce veuaderscew adc eset vended 0664 debe 5).0b06sb0Es 12

PS HAMON OCCU LEGION cos is kacaseccestntariecscadvacws oveeubeteebinsdgaasceweaeaenes 26
LPNS COONS LU TRINGR sc e)s. 635 yor ckdc wen bulcdud Seabesece db dieses penbanebomebecces sean e 17

DL TAMO COGUTE DO Cie a we ae aaa. ai ei tens seev wee ciscceteaess Seveieors 20
PAG COCUIG HP CINNONGs co Sadsclioens s0GUbs ebbedclecee Bio cdaceubeclsceascos buanke seeded 25

1,171 2, 106

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE.

TABLE II1,--Showing recurrence of surnames and percentages of the whole,
(American Asylum, 1877 Report. )

Peseeneee of the

Nuinber of apie
wh 0) ie,

Number of surnames, represen

764 names ocour once, Coateqes sede
214 names occur twice . cb swaser ée
193 names occur three or more times .. el

1,171

|

The American Asylum, at Hartford, Conn., was established in 1817, under the patronage of
Congress, as a school to be open to all the deaf-mutes of the United States. As new centers of
instruction sprang up the supply of pupils from the more distant States was practically cut off,
and the institution is more representative of the New England States than of the whole country.

This will be obvious from the following table (Table LV), which gives a synopsis of 2,109 cases
admitted to the asylum before May, 1877, classified according to residence.

TABLE IV.— Classification of pupils in respect to residence.

(American Asylum, 1877 Report.)

Where from. he || Where from.
3 | Connecticut
| New Hampshire 11 | California
| Vermont 3 | Pennsylvania
|| Maryland
|| New York
|| Illinois
Michigan..........
VIPRINIB hoc teccatessosacssce || Wisconsin
North Carolina .. i
South Carolina so | British Provinces
Georgia ees West Indies
Alabama irgini
Louisiana

— =e =
S| pe Rannekodwd:

=

|

In order to show that the numerous recurrence of surnames is not confined to the deaf-mutes
of the New Engiand States nor to the pupils of our oldest institutions, I give a list of recurring
surnames taken from the 1882 report of the Illinois Institution.

This institution, although only opened in 1846, is now the largest of its kind in the world, and
it may fairly be taken as representative of a large section of country in the West.*

TABLE V.—Recurrence of surnames among 1,620 pupils admitted between the years 1846 and 1882.
(Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, Ill.)

Names occurring 18 times: Smith.

Names occurring 16 times: Brown.

Names occurring 10 times: Anderson, Miller.
Names occurzing 9 times: Edwards, Wilson.
Names oonurring 8 times: Johnson.

¥ As the American Asylum and Illinois Institution may be taken as representative institutions, I present in an
appendix a critical analysis of all the cases recorded in the reports referred to. (See Tables A to N, in the appendix. )

For this analysis I am indebted to Mr. Franck Z. Maguire, of Washington, D. C., and I bave personally veritied
his resuits,

j
it

5. eas

8 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES,

Y+ 08 ocourring 7 times: Davis, Jones,

Names occurring 6 times: Kelly, Mitchell, Moore, Welch, White, Williams, Wright.

Names occurring 5 times: Adams, Allon, Clark, Hall, Leo, Long, Stophens, Taylor, Thompson, Wolf,

Names occurring 4 times: Bailey, Barnes, Berry, Cox, Gunn, Harris, Hixon, Huffman, Jacoby, James
McClielland, Murphy, Sturgeon, Sullivan, Townsend, Walker.

Names occurring 3 tes: Ammons, Baker, Ballard, Beyd, Brasher, Brooks, Buckley, Campbell, Carroll,
Chamberlain, Conn, Copher, Crawford, Darnell, Doyer, Ford, Fuller, Gibson,
Goodner, Goodwin, Gortechalg, Gray, Harper, Hill, Keil, Konnedy, Laughlin,
McFarland, McGary, Mclean, McNeal, Merrill, Morgan, Neilson, Nichols,
Simmonds, Sterling, Stewart, Stout,

Names occurring 2 times: These are too numerous to be quoted here, There ure 150 of them.

The following tables show that the pupils referred to above constitute more than 41 per cent.
of the whole number of pupils admitted :

TABLE V1.—Recurrence of surnames among the pupils of the Illinois Institution for the Deas and

Dumb.
(1882 Report.)
No. of pupils
represented.
GBS mamiew COCUE 1 PMO .... cccccccccees seccccccceccscecses seeees cteveccececesececs
150 names ocour & times ...... 0.0. eee e cece coe eee cen eet cece cenee siccegenebededet 300
39 names Occur 3 timed ...... 6.220. cece cecees cecece cee cone seen senecssesees seanse 117
16 names occur 4 time 60... 6 cee eee cece cee e cece cee ees ceeeee sees senses cecees 64
10 names occur 5 times ...... ..26- ce cece cece wees db ecweddea. bane seAbNOTEs ee asemeshe 50
7 DARIO COCUE CiRMOB Ss cic c ii cee sdedecse 60 seve dceeeccdeces deoseesecdbevececdde 42
BD NAMED COOUT TMI ci eie cece ceccde cccnediscccedscecccscecececeed secceecceccece 14
1 WARIS COSTES CS WMIOR casi dvc cess pcedisecadcescidesisccecdee sees cvcdasiccse cee0ee 8
@ NAMES COST O HMEB ees cc vecrccdeccccce seccvcscceseccssces seseedseccscoese 18
2 names COOUF 10 tMES ...... coos socces cece cecess cone seeces cecesesccces seccescees 20
1 name occurs 16 times .... 0.2.6 cece cece cece ee cece ee ce eeee cone cues ceneeeeeeeee 16
1 tame COCUTO 1B HOION 6c cece coccee pesos Mrvcccesccccs covets cdccccceseseeveces cece 18
1, 184 1, 620
J

TABLE VII..—Recurrence of surnames and percentages of the whole.

(Illinois Institution, 1882 Report.)

Number of: surnames, Number of pupils | Percentage of the

| represented, whole,
| Z =
953 names Occur ONCO ...... 200. --e0e. 953 | 58.8 |
150 names occur twice ...........+ ee6e- | 300 18.5 |
81 names occur three or more times ...| 367 | 22.7 |
1,184 1, 620 100, 0

The recurrence of numerous surnames among the pupils of very many of our institutions for
the deaf and dumb renders it highly probable that a considerable proportion of the deaf-mutes of the
country belong to families containing more than one deaf-mute, and hence possess hereditary tendencies
to deafness.

The same conclusion is still more forcibly suggested to the mind by a perusal of the few insti-
tution reports that record the deaf-mute relatives of the pupils. The following tables (Tables
VIII, IX, X, XI, XI) bearing upon this subject have been compiled from the 1877 Report of the

Pupils having deaf and

dumb relatives.

-=— ——— =

ey

BB pce pees pe es pt eps pe pt bt dt ASS wat AS et AO) et ee SS

i

Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils

1 great grandfather,
i grandfather.

1 grandfather, father, mother and other relatives,

1 gal futher, 3 children, and other rela-
tives,
1 grandfather, father, and brother.
1 grandfather, father, and sister,
father and mother
father, mother, and 1 brother,
father, mother, and 2 brothers,
father, mother, and 2 sisters,
father, mother, 1 brother, and 1 sister.
futher, mother, 2 brothers, and 1 sister.
father, mother, 1 brother, and 2 sisters,
futher, mother, 1 brother, and 5 uncles and
aunts,
father, mother, 1 sister, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt,
father, mother, 2 brothers, and 2 uncles,
father, mother, 2 sisters, and 1 uncle,
futher, mother, 1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 uncle.
father, mother, and 1 cousin,
father, son, 1 sister, 2 nephews, and 5 other rela-
tives,
futher, 2 sisters, and other relatives.
father, 1 brother, and 1 sister,
father, 1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 cousin,
father, 4 brothers, 1 sister, and 1 cousin.
father, 3 brothers, 2 sisters, and 1 cousin,
mother and 1 brother,
mother and 2 sisters,
mother, 1 brother, and 1 sister,
mother, 1 brother, 2 sisters, and 1 cousin,
mother, 2 brothers, 1 sister, and 1 cousin.
mother and 1 uncle,
mother and 2 uncles,
1 child,
1 child and 1 brother.
1 child and 1 sister,
1 child and 2 sisters.
1 child and 1 cousin.
2 children and 1 brother.
2 children, 1 brother, and 2 sisters.
3 children.
3 children and 1 brother,
3 children, 1 brother, and 1 cousin,
3 children and 1 cousin.
3 children and other relatives.
4 children.
5 children and 1 brother.
5 children and 2 brothers,
5 children, 1 brother, and 2 sisters,
1 sister.

*See ‘The sixty-first annual report of the directors and officers of the American Asylum, at Hartford, for the
education and instruction of the deaf .and dumb,” presented to the asylum May 15, 1877, pp. 42-98.

99 a—BELL——2

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE,

Pupils having deaf and
dumb relatives.

.
-_

-_ 4
ee ee ee ee ee

- trea
Eee ee wee eee ewe ewer

— es

ee~weSoeecnwee

American Asylum.* They show that of 2,106 pupils admitted to that institution, 693, or nearly
33 per cent, were known to have deaf-mute relatives.
apparent when we find that in the majority of these cases the pupils have more than one rela-
tive deaf and dumb, while in a few cases as many as fifteen deaf-mute relatives are recorded.

The sigaificance of this becomes more

TABLE VILI,— Deas and dumb relatives of the pupils of the American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes, from
the 1877 Report,

Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils,

2 sisters,

3 sisters,

4 sisters,

1 sister andl cousin,

1 sister, 1 cousin, and 1 uncle,

1 sister and 3 cousins.

1 sister, 3 cousins, and 1 uncle,

1 sister and 4 cousins,

1 sister, 6 cousins, and 1 uncle.

1 sister and 1 unele,

1 sister and 1 aunt,

1 sister, 2 annts and other relatives.

1 sister and other relatives,

1 sister and 4 other relatives.

1 sister and 14 other relatives.

1 sister and 7 other relatives.

2 sisters and 1 cousin.

2 sisters and 2 cousins.

2 sisters and 3 cousins.

2 sisters and 1 second-cousin,

1 brother,

1 brother and 1 sister.

1 brother and 2 sisters.

1 brother and 3 sisters.

1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 cousin,

1 brother, 2 sisters, and 2 cousins.

\ brother, 1 sister, and 3 cousins.

1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 second-cousin.
1 brother, 1 sister, 1 cousin, and 1 uncle.
1 brother and 1 cousin.

1 brother and 3 cousins.

1 brother and 4 cousins.

1 brother, 4 cousins, and other relatives.
1 brother and 1 aunt.

1 brother and 1 niece.

1 brother and 2 nephews.

1 brother and other relatives.

1 brother and 7 other relatives.

1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 second-cousin.
2 brothers.

2 brothers and 1 sister.

2 brothers and 2 sisters.

2 brothers and 1 cousin.

2 brothers, 2 cousins, and 2 uncles,

2 brothers, 1 sister, and 2 cousins.

2 brothers, 2 sisters, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt.
2 brothers, 2 sisters, and 11 other relatives.
3 brothers.

| 3 brothers and 1 sister,

| 3 brothers and 3 sisters.

| 3 brothers, 1 sister, and 2 second-cousins.
| 4 brothers.

10 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

TABLE VIII.—Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils of American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes, &c.—Coutinued.

Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils. Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils,

dumb relatives.

dumb reiatives.
Popils having deaf and

| Pupils having deaf and |

| 1 uncle and 1 aunt.
| 2 uncles,
1 niece
| 1 nephew.
| 2 nephews, 2 nieces, and lother relative.
| 1 second-consin,
| 2 second-cousins.
1 third-cousin.
1 relative.
2 relatives,
Relatives.
4 relatives.
4 remote relatives.
6 relatives.

4 brothers and 2 sisters.

5 brothers,

5 brothers and 1 sister,

1 cousin.

1 cousin and 1 uncle,

2 cousins.

2 cousins and 1 aunt,

3 consins,

3 cousins and 3 great-uncles.

3 cousins and 2 uneles,

3 cousins and 2 other relatives.
4 cousins,

Cousins,

Several cousins,

1 aunt, —--—
1 uncle. 693

ph pret ph bak Set bet ai Dt tt

Pupils having deaf-mute relatives ...... 0.0.0. cece ee cee eee tees Pe PEAT eT a
Pupils recorded as sporadic cases

TOW se setiinse ccuiaens esc cpsapsrareseeteus ress. ° Pere I eee i pt

TABLE IX.—Deaf-mute relatives of the pupils.

(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.)

1 pupil had one or more great-grandparents deaf and duinb,
5 pupils had one or more grandparents deaf and dumb,
47 pupils had one or more parents deaf and dumb.
29 pupils had one or more children deaf and dumb,
593 pupils had one or more brothers or sisters deaf and dumb,
100 pupils had one or more cousins deaf and dumb.
38 pupils bad one or more uncles or aunts deaf and dumb,
1 pupil had one or more great-unceles or aunts deaf and dumb.
| 48 pupils had one or more distant relatives deaf and dumb.

TABLE X.—Deaf-mute children of the pupils.

(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.)

29 pupils bad 1 or more children deaf and dumb.
15 pupils had 2 or more children deaf and dumb,
13 pupils had 3 or more children deaf and dumb,
4 pupils had 4 or more children deaf and dumb,
3 pupils had 5 or more children deaf and dumb.

TABLE XI.—Deaf-mute brothers and sisters of the pupils.

(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.)

593 pupils bad 1 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb.
271 pupils had 2 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb,
116 pupils had 3 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb,
51 pupils had 4 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb.
15 pupils had 5 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb,
11 pupils had 6 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 11

TABLE XIJ.—Showing number of pupils having one or more deaf-mute relatives.
(American Asylum for Deaf-' ites. Report for 1877.)

693 pupils had 1 or more relatives deaf and dumb.
374 pupils had 2 or more relatives deaf and dumb.
224 pupils had 3 or more relatives deaf and dumb.
120 pupils had 4 or more relatives deaf and dumb,
65 pupils had 5 or wore relatives deaf and dumb,
7 pupils had 6 or more relatives deaf and dumb.
15 pupils had 7 or more relatives deaf and dumb.

9 pupils had 8 or more relatives deaf and dumb,

4 pupils had 10 or more relatives deaf and dumb.

3 pupils had 15 or more relatives deaf and dumb.

Without going into detail, the results may be noted of an examination of a few other institution
reports* where the deaf-mute relatives are recorded.

TABLE XII1.—Proportion of the deaf and dumb having deaf-mute relatives,

Number of Percentage of

1" . pupils hav- yupils hav-

Institutions. apg rt ing deaf- fag deat-

Me) mute rela- mute rela-

tives, tives.

American Asylum.............. 2, 106 6938 32,9
New York Institution...... a8 1, 165 380 32.6
Ohio Institution . ... 2.2.2 cece cocces cccccccccces wees 560 166 29.6
Indiana Institution. ...... 00... eee eee ee eee cee eee 283 103 36.4
Illinois Institution........ 0.2.22... eee eee eee eee eee 1, 620 356 21.7
LOSER DAUEUHON's bose gcc iss ss vee daed Ese siessencswenes 89 21 23.6
DOCS cebhcpabrretes ckcekesebeahe cers cevbeceeace 5, 823 1,719 29,5

The above table shows us that out of 5,823 deaf-mutes taken from different parts of the country
no less than 1,719, or 294 per cent., were known to have relatives deaf and dumb.

If this proportion holds for the whole country, we must have in the United States about 10,000
deaf-mutes who belong to families containing more than one deaf-mute.t

It is to be feared that the intermarriage of such persons would be attended by calamitous results
to their offspring.

These are not, however, the only cases in which we would anticipate that the deafness of the
parents might be transmitted to the children, The lessons we have learned from the lower animals
. concerning heredity teach us that a certain physical peculiarity, which may normaily make its
appearance only sporadically here and there, may be perpetuated and rendered hereditary, by suit-
able selection, during a number of generations, of those individuals that happen to possess the
peculiarity from birth.

“The tables relating to the deaf- mutes of Ohio, Indiana, New York, Texas, end Mlinois have been compiled from
the following sources:

1, Ohio. “List of pupils admitted to the Ohio Asylum previously to January, 1854.” American Annals of the Deaf
and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 101-116.

2. Indiana. ‘Catalogue of the pupils of the Indiana Institution from its commencement in 1343 to November 1,
1853.” American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 162-169.

3. New York. ‘List of pupils of the New York Institution, &c., complete from May, 1818, to January, 1854.”
American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 195-225,

4, Texas. ‘ List of pupils in attendance at the Texas Institution (1881).” See Exhibit A, twenty-fifth annua}
report of the superintendent of the Texas Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Austin, Tex., November 1, 1831.

5. Illinois, “ List of pupils of the Illino‘> iastitution admitted between 1846 and 1852.” Twenty-first biennial
report of the trustees, superintendent, and treasurer of the Illinois Institution for the Education of the Deaf and
Dumb. Jacksonville, Ill., Octuber 1, 1882.
tThe number is probably greate", even exceeding twelve thousand, as will be seen further on, (See Table XVII).

12 MEMOIRS OF THR NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

We have good reason, therefore, to fear that the intermarriage of congenital deaf-mutes, even
though the deafness in both cases might be sporadic, would result in many cases in the production
of deaf offspring. It is important, then, to arrive at some idea of the numbers of the deaf and
dumb who are deaf from birth.

The Compendium of the Tenth Census of the United States shows us that there were living in :

this country on the 1st of June, 1880, no less than 33,878 deaf-mutes, and that “more than one- j
half” were congenitally deaf.*
4 The proportion can be obtained more exactly from an address delivered in Jacksonville, IIl.,
. on the 29th day of August, 1882, before the tenth convention of American instructors of the deaf
and dumb, by the Rev. Fred. H. Wines,+ who had charge of the department of the census relating
to the deaf anddumb. Pending the full publication of the census returns, the statements of Mr.
Wines concerning the census of the deaf and dumb must evidently be received as authoritative.

In the address referred to Mr. Wines gave the results of an analysis of 22,472 cases from the
census, from which it appears that of these deaf-mutes 12,154, or 54.1 per cent., were reported as
congenitally deaf, and 10,318, or 45.9 per cent., were stated to have lost their hearing after birth.

If we apply these figures to the total mentioned in the Compendium of the Census (33,878)
we find that there are probably 18,328 congenital and 15,550 non-congenital deaf-mutes in the
United States.

Deductions drawn from the breeding of animals would lead us to expect that the congenitally
deaf would be more likely than those who became deaf from accidental causes to transmit their
defect to their offspring. Another indication pointing in the same direction is to be found in the
fact that the proportion of the deaf and dumb who have deaf-mute relatives is very much greater
among the congenital than among the non-congenital deaf-mutes.

The following tables (Tables XIV, XV, and XVI) have been compiled from the reports of
the American institutions for the deaf and dumb already referred to:

TABLE XIV.

Pupils recorded to have

Ve ry ¥ Y ° :
Cause of deafness.“ “qeaf-mute relatives.

Cause of deafness,

Name of institution.

tendance during the years

Pupils were admitted or were in at-

Total number of pupils.

Disease or accident.

Total number admitted or in
attendance

Not stated.

Congenital.
| Disease or accident.

| Date of opening.

| Congenital.

|
|

| American Asylum ............ 1817 , 1817-1877 2,106 973 1,040 93 693 552 131) 10
New York Institution ........ 18s 1818-1853 11,165 488 432 245 3x0 9 287 74) #19
| Ohio Institution ........... .. 1829 1829-1553 | 560 208 = 268 a4 166 118 82) «16
| Indiana Institution. .......... 1844 18 4-1853 | 283 149 124 10 108 72 Ob lsvsces
Illinois Institution ........... 1846 1846-1882 1, 620 4i8 947 255 356 194 120 42

, Texas Institution ............ 1857

WOU cvewe-s 5tcey ebveises cleanses] chbseneeaers 5,823 2,262 2,864

* Compendium of the Tenth Census, Part II, page 1664,
e tSee Proceedings of the Tenth Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, I1.,
August, 1882, pp. 122-128, published by the Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, IL, with the
twenty-first biennial report of that Institution.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE.

TABLE XV.—Proportion of the non-congenitally deaf who have deaf-mute relatives.

aes: Number of | Number having Percentage
Institutions. non-congenital | deaf-mute rel- having deaf-mute
deaf-mutes, atives. relatives,

American Asylum 131 12,6
New York Institution

Ohio Institution

Indiana Institution

Thlinois Institution

Texas Institution

Total

TABLE XVI.—Proportion of the congenitally deaf who have deaf-mute relatives,

. Number Number having Percentage |
Institutions. of congenitally deaf-mute rel- havin deaf-mute |
deaf pupils. atives, relatives. |

American Asylum 973
New York Ins itution

Ohio Institution

Indiana Institution

Illinois Institution

Texas Institution

Total........ ESET TEM CHELAN BERUNE ROE Oe. 2, 262

The above tables (Tables XIV, XV, and XVI) show that of 2,262 congenital deaf-mutes, more
than one-half—or 54.5 per cent.—had deaf-mute relatives; and that even in the case of those pupils
who became deaf from apparently accidental causes, 13.8 per cent. had other members of their families
deaf and dumb.

If we apply these results to the total returned by the Tenth Census, we obtain the following
figures (Table XVII) as a probable approximation to the number of sporadic and non-sporadic
cases of deafness among the deaft-mutes of the country.

TABLE X VII.—Estimate of the probable number of sporadic and non-sporadic cases of deafness among
the deaf-mutes of the United States in the year 1880.

Number who
Cause of deatness. | have relatives | Sporadic cases, Total.
deaf and dumb,

Congenital 18, 328
Disease or accident 15, 550

Total | 2, 13 33, 878

If to the estimated number of deaf-mutes who have relatives deaf and dumb we add the pre-
sumed number of sporadic cases among the congenital deaf-mutes we reach a total of 20,474 cases
where the deafness would probably tend to become hereditary by intermarriage. But these are

Sree re

7

14 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES,

not all the cases in which we would anticipate that intermarriage might be productive of deaf oft-
spring. The late Dr. Harvey L. Peet states, as the result of his researches,* that the hearing
brothers and sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to have deaf children as the deaf-mute himself.
It is only reasonable to assume that a tendency towards deafness exists in a family containing
more than one deaf-mute, so that if hearing persons belonging to such families were to intermarry,
or were to marry deaf-mutes—or if a consanguineous marriage were to take place in such a family—
we would not be surprised if some of the offspring should be deaf. In addition therefore to the
20,474 deaf-mutes referred to above, we must include the hearing and speaking members of their families
before we can form an adequate conception of the number of persons who possess a predisposition towards
deafness.

It will thus be seen that we have abundant materials in the United States for the formation
of a deaf variety of the human race by selection in marriage.

“American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, p. 235.

CHAPTER II.

MARRIAGES OF THE DEAF.

Having shown that a large proportion of the deaf and dumb possess hereditary tendencies
toward deafness, the question naturally arises: “Do many of the deaf and dumb marry?”

It is the custom in some of our institutions to hold periodical reunions of former pupils, and in
some cases advantage has been taken of the opportunities thus presented to obtain information con-
cerning the marriages of the pupils, &e. An examination of the reports of the American Asylum,
New York, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois institutions, yields the following result: :

TABLE XVIII.

Total number

Total number
Seek bate Ly Date of Date of A recorded to Percent-
Name of institution. opening. report. i tinve. inate age.
| i ried, |

American Asylum....-...... 1817 1877 2,106 642 30.5
New York Institution ....... 1818 1854 1, 165 191 16.4
Ohio Institution ............ | 1829 1854 560 56 10,0
Indiana Institution. ........ | 1844 1854 287 26 9.1
Illinois Institution.......... 1846 1882 1, 620 174 10.7
DOUGH aa sie abs de binses lnssestieasebelaanemeeceses 5, 738 1, 089 19.0

*The total number of pupils noted includes the children who were in attendance at the dates of the reports.

In the Appendix I have presented in tabular form a critical analysis of all the cases mentioned
in the reports of the American Asylum and Mlinois Institution, classifying the pupils according to
the decades in which they were born. The labor involved has deterred me from making a similar
examination of the pupils of the New York, Ohio, and Indiana institutions until more complete
materials can be obtained than are to be found in reports published in 1854, The Anierican
Asylum and Illinois Institution, however, as I have stated before, may be may be taken as repre
sentative institutions, and an examination of the tables in the Appendix leads to the conclusion that
a very considerable proportion of the deaf children admitted to our institutions marry. This will be ob-
vious, from the following considerations:

Pupils of the American Asylum, born in the year 1840, were 37 years of age in 1877 (the date
of the report), and the pupils of the Illinois Institution, born in 1840, were 42 years of age in 1882
(the date of the Illinois report), hence we may safely assume that, of the pupils of these institutions
who were born before 1840, all, or pearly all, who intended to marry had married before the dates
of the reports; and in most cases it is probable that the fact of marriage had been recorded. If,

15

Og SE

LER TPL,

pr

OC LOLOL LOCO LA Ce

16 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.
then, we eliminate from the totals given in the above table, all the pupils of these institutions who
were born since the year 1839, we obtain the following results:

TABLE XIX.—Proportion of the pupils of our institutions for the deaf and dumb who marry.

Total number

Totalnumber ““o¢ these re-

PTE Teepe eee Date of Date of of pupils Se he Percent-
Name of institation, opening. report. born before eset age.
1840. ried.
American Asylum .......... 1817 1877 1, 100 522 47.4
Illinois Institution.......... 1846 1882 159 49 30.8
OCR Ss cescsintesaspesbtiees Senn pere|samegese was’ 1, 259 571 45.4

Whatever may be the exact percentage for the whole country, the indications are that a

considerable proportion of the adult deaf-mutes of the United States are married.
INTERMARRIAGES OF THE DEAF AND DUMB.

When we attempt fo form an idea of the extent to which intermarriage takes place among
deaf-mutes, we are met by the difficulty of the imperfection of the institution records. In very
few cases is it specifically stated that a deaf-mute has married a hearing person.* The record
usually stands that the pupil has “married a deaf-mute,” or that he is simply “married,” leaving
it uncertain whether the marriage was contracted with another deaf-mute or with a hearing person.
When we eliminate all the uncertain cases we obtain from the institution reports the following

results:
TABLE XX.—Proportion of the deaf and dumb who marry deaf-mutes.

Total number Total number

ite pe of pupilsre- recorded to oN
Name of institution. Bear orl corded to have mar. panent
! 5° Spor have mar- ried = deaf- wae
ried, mutes,

American Asylum .......... 1817 1877 642 502 72.2
New York Institution....... 1818 1854 191 142 74.3
Ohio Institution............ 1829 1854 56 39 69.6
Indiana Institution. ........ 1844 1854 26 21 0.8
Illinois Institution.......... 1846 1882 174 152 87.3
TOtAb ce sec ites tence 1, 089 856 78.6

The large percentage of marriages with deaf-mutes reported from Indiana and Illinois suggests
the explanation that intermarriages among the deaf and dumb may perhaps have become more common
of late years. Both institutions are of comparatively recent origin (the one founded in 1844, the

other in 1846); and the report of the Lllinois Institution, which exhibits the largest proportion of
deaf-mute intermarriages, contains the record of much later marriages than those mentioned in the
Indiana report, for the Indiana record stops at 1854, whereas the Illinois report gives the statistics
of the institution to October, 1882.

Unfortunately we are unable to ascertain from the reports ‘he dates of the marriages. If we
assume, however, that as a general rule the older deaf-mutes were married before the younger, we

*Only one case in the American Asylum and ten in the [linois Institution. It is probable, however, that in
most cases where the pupil is simply recorded as “married” the record means marriage with a hearing person.

; in

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE 17

may be able to approximate to the order of the marriages by classifying the pupils according to
their period of birth. Although I have not attempted a minute classitication, excepting in the
cases shown in the Appendix, it is comparatively easy to arrange all the married pupils referred to
above into four classes: (1) those born before 1810; (2) those boru in the period 1810-1839; (3) those
born in the period 1840-1859; (4) those born since the commencement of 1860, The results are
shown in the following table:

TABLE XXI,.

Total

Total |
recorded
Period of birth. recorded to have Percent-
to have married age.
married, ne
deaf-mutes.
Before 1810.. Sted eb te eaNsiaeeaeede Reomendbebieees 129 72 | 55.8
MPLA UNS AMPED Gb: 8Sb 0s (56 pa GTS 4460 ee OC ca bebs edendecteeRed 716 577 | 80.7
MUU MU RDEMNSLESIIG Fga hess ceideeceseescleass pevedest 16d dee 233 . 196 | 84.1
TOOU BI AILOR sede states cater dc ccacebeavedeed catecesegeet 12 11 | 91.7 |

The number married who were born since 1859 is too small to be relied upon for a percentage.
It is only to be hoped that the percentage given above is excessive. The indications are very
clear, however, that of the deaf and dumb who marry, the proportion who marry deaf-mutes has
steadily increased. This conclusion is strengthened when we find that the above result, which has
been deduced from a summation of all the cases recorded in the reports of the American Asylum,
New York, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois institutions, is also true of the cases recorded in each report
taken separately. This will be obvious from the following table:

TABLE XXII.

Total
Total
Name of institution, with date of opening Period of birth recorded to kooueiad fo Percent-
and of report. * ee ried deaf- age.
5 mutes.
American Asylum. Vabier eivssseeees Before 1810. .... 100 55 55.0
Date of opening, 1517. Date of report, 1810 to 1839. .... 422 350 82.9
1877. 1840 to 1859. .... 120 97 80.8 |
New York Institution ....... Before 1810..... 29 17 58.6 |
Date of opening, 1818. Date of report, | 1810 to 1839. .... 162 125 77.2 |
1854,
Ohio Institution ...............- 1810 to 1832..... 56 39° 69.6
Date of opening, 1829. Date of report,
1854.
Indiana Institution . eeeee 18220 1836..... 26 21 | 80,8
Date of opening, 1844. Date of report, |
1254,
Illinois Institution ..:............-...-.-.. 1810 to 1839. .... 49 | 42 | 85.7
Date of opening, 1846. Date of report, | 1840 to 1859..... 113 99 | 87.6
7

1882, | 1860 and after .. 12 11 91,

|
|

The only institution that gives any indication of a decrease in the proportion of pupils mar-
ried to deaf-mutes is the American Asylum. The pupils born in 1859 were only 18 years of age

99 A—BELL——3

Po A OPER IE AE: EIS ED AE RNG HOI

OR oe OM TE PRINT oS

a ea

Pe eases Fad eT ee

18 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

in 1877, the date of the report, so that it is certain that a considerable number of the pupils born
between 1840 and 1859 were married after the date of the report, and so escaped enumeration. It
is questionable, however, whether this could affect the proportion who were married to deaf-mutes.

It is more reasonable to suppose that in this case the apparent decrease is real, for an entirely
different method of investigation leads to a similar result. In the years 1843, 1857, 1867, and 1877
the directors of the American Asylum published in their reports the statistics of the institution,
giving the names of those pupils who had. married, If we assume that the pupils who were not
recorded as married in the 1843 report, but who were recorded as married in the 1857 report, were
married between the years 1843 and 1857, &., we can divide the marriages reported from the
American Asylum into four classes: (1) Marriages contracted before 1843, (2) marriages contracted
between 1843 and 1857, (3) marriages contracted between 1857 and 1867, and (4) marriages con-
tracted between 1867 and 1877. The results are shown in the following table:

TABLE XXIJI.—Marriages of the pupils of the American Asylum.

| Total
Total | recorded |
Presumed date of marriage. lrecorded as| to have | Percentage.
| married. | married

deaf-mutes. |

FATA dese Seo ok Sse salves d cdi badse Cesacusetaacetesaee 143 95 66.4
Between 1843 and 1857...... ..cccececceeeceececee coceeeccee 217 175 80.6 |
Between 1857 and 1867 .. 131 | 110 84.0
Mat weanvlGO? GUGle7 2 soc <esccccccccatiesscccesescosececsitess 151 122 80.8 |

In this case we find that although the number of pupils presumed to have married between
1867 and 1877 is greater than the number who married in the preceding decade, the proportion
who married deaf-mutes is less.

It is evident from a comparison of all the tables that of the deaf-mutes who marry at the present
time not less than 80 per cent. marry deaf-mutes, while of those who married during the early half of
the present century the proportion who married deaf-mutes was much smaller.

It is of course a matter of importance to ascertain to what extent congenital deaf-mutes
intermarry, but unfortunately the institution records are too imperfect to allow us to draw con-
clusions on this point. Six hundred and fifty-four pupils of the American Asylum and Illinois
Institution are each recorded simply to have “married a deaf-mute,” without one word of expla.
nation as to the name of the deaf-mute or the cause of deafness.*

It will thus be understood that the records of deaf-mute marriages are very imperfect, and it
is to be hoped that some of our large institutions may publish fuller information concerning them.
In the case of a deaf-mute partner it should be stated whether the deafness was congenital or not.

* Since the reading of this paper it occurred to me that some light might be thrown upon the subject by the
theory of Probabilities. I therefore submitted the question to Prof. Simon Newcomb, who not only agreed with me
fa in this idea, but was kind enough to present a solution of the problem deduced from the data giyen in this paper.
He thinks the most probable conclusion to be this:
1, Of the congenitally deaf who married deaf-mutes one-half married congenitally deaf and one-half non-con-
genitally deaf,
$ 2. Of the non-congenitally deaf who married deaf-mutes three-sevenths married congenitally deaf and four
e sevenths non-congenitally deaf.
The fall text of Professor Newcomb’s letters will be found in Appendix Z.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 19

I would also suggest that, wherever possible, the names of the husbands and wives of the pupils
should be given, and the fact recorded as to whether they belong to families containing more than
one deaf-mute or not. This is important even in the case of marriage with a hearing person, for
jn most of the cases of such marriages that have come under my personal observation the hearing
partner belonged to a family containing deaf-mutes.

However imperfect may be the records of the marriages of the deaf it is abundantly evident,
(1) that there is a tendency umong deaf-mutes to select deaf-mutes as their partners in marriage ; (2)
that this tendency has been continuously exhibited during the past forty or fifty years, and (3) that there-
fore there is every probability that the selection of the deaf by the deaf in marriage «will continue in the
Suture.

It is evident, then, that we have here to consider, not an ephemeral phenomenon, but a case of
continuous selection. For instance, should it appear that there are in this country any considerable
number of deaf-mutes who are themselves the offspring of deaf-mutes the indications are that a
large proportion of these persons will marry, and that of those who marry, the majority will marry
deaf-mutes. Thus, there is every indication that in the case of the deaf and dumb the work of
selection will go on from generation to generation.

i tg OPED TE

SSE LT AEA CCY ED

£1
i
x
:
&

CuHapTerR III.

DEAF-MUTE OFFSPRING OF DEAF-MUTE MARRIAGES,

: 3 In a paper upon “ Hereditary Deafness ”* (published in 1868), Rev. W. W. Turner, then prin-
™ cipal of the American Asylum, said that “ statistics, carefully collated from records kept of deaf-
mutes as they have met in conventions at Hartford, show that in 86 families with one parent a
congenital deaf-mute, one-tenth of the children were deaf ; and in 24 families with both parents congenital
deaf-mutes, about one-third were born deaf,

In support of this conclusion he presented the following table :

TABLE XXIV.

| f Number of | Number of |

| Number o
Fe Class. Parents. ¢ children children | Total.
} families. deaf, hearing.
1 | One hearing and 1 eqneenltaily deaf .. 30 15 77 ;
: One incidentally and 1 petgen pends deaf. .... 56 6 120 126
| Both congenitally deaf . Sent 24 17 40 57
MONA iaveciars ssecev cess sexs a saaieas 110 a a |

Dr. Turner cited in connection with his subject the case of one woman who lived to see great
grandchildren, and of these no less than sixteen were deaf-mutes.

Regarding intermarriage, he said: “ It is a well-known fact that among domestic animals cer-
tain unusual variations of form or color which sometimes occur among their offspring, may, by a
careful selection of others similar and by a continued breeding of like with like, be rendered per-
manent, so as to constitute a distinct variety. The same course adopted and pursued in the human
race would undoubtedly lead to the same result.” He concluded with the remark, “ that every
i consideration of philanthropy as well as the interests of congenitally deaf persons themselves should
i induce their teachers and friends to urge upon them the impropriety of intermarriage.”

It is reasonable to suppose that, whatever influence Dr. Turner’s statements may have exerted
upon the marriages of the deaf throughout the country, his conclusions and beliefs must have had
considerable weight with the pupils of his own institution, and this may perhaps have been the
cause of the decrease in the proportion of intermarriages noted among the pupils of his institution
since the date of his paper. (See Table XXIII.)

In the report of the New York Institution, published in the American Annals of the Deaf and
Dumb, July, 1854 (vol. vi, pp. 193 to 241), Dr. Harvey L. Peet gave the following table, showing
the number of pupils of the New York Institution married, as compared with the married pupils
of other American institutions, and compared with the marriages of the deaf in Europe, no distine-
tion being made between those who were congenitally deaf and those who became deaf from acci-
dental causes.

*See Proceedings National Conference of Principals of Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb, Washington, D.C.,
1863; sce, also, American Annals for the Deaf and Dumb, 1868, Vol. XIII, pp. 244-246; also article “Deaf and Dumb”
Encyclopwdia Britannica,

20

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE 21

Dr. Peet stated that of all the families embraced in thé table “about one in twenty have
deaf-mute children where both parents are deaf-mutes, and about one in one hundred, and thirty-fice
where only one is a deaf-mute; and that the brothers and sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to
have deaf-mute children as the deaf-mute himself, supposing cach to marry into families that have or
or each into families that have not shown a predisposition toward deaf-dumbness,”

TABLE XXYV,.

Married hearing Married deaf-mutes. |

Name of institution, persons,

Males, Females. = Malea, Females,

Pupils of the New York Institution” ............ ++. 19 20 66
Pupils of the Hartford Asylum" ..........ee0e. cess 43 25 104 89
Pupils of the Ohio Asylum...... 6.0. +--eee cece cee ee 13 4 18 21
Pupils of the pelea cays ch scien hears 28 8 6 6
City of Paris .. Prarrretr ie een 4 4 15 ee
Belgium (census of 1835) Se aedes ec weECeHueseekeceser T Wetebaeaays 1 1
Treland (census Of 1851) 0... -..- cece cere eee ee cee eee 45 32 5 5
Yorkshire Institution (England) ..............-.+.-. 1 BP “liecveaesetl toavaneses]
Leipsic Institution (Germany) .......eeee. cence eens 4 1 leveveccceclevercecees
Prague Institution (Bohemia) ...... Fonweneees Go” hieswemeent 2 2
Luxemburg Institution (Netherlands) .. (uaahhaee? DH . Wee wevnndsleless ceive cehesetecedee

=

Lyons Institution (France). . Riesh Caeexeaies

Geneva Institution (Switzerland) .. Wugietiwe vess 1 eaervases ies i Re Ae a
Russia Institution (incidental notices). eed oreeesesine S hecdromace
Bavaria Institution (incidental notices) ............. L Uraueccupushevaeveangenetuceeane
| ‘Total . Vevdetetinaeiek. Siam 106 218 217
| Deduct the three American institutions.........----. 75 58 148 187
Remains for Furope ...... 0222-2 -0e cece cece eee eee 113 48 30 30

*Some marriages have been deducted from the Hartford list that appear also in the New York
list. There have also been marriages between educated and uneducated mutes, or between deaf-
mutes of our schools and semi-mutes not pupils.

From this table it appears that at the time of the investigation (1854) marriages of deaf-mutes
and especially between two deaf mutes, were far more common in America than in Europe ; and that,
except among the pupils of the New York Institution, there were twice as many deaf-mute men with
hearing wives, as deaf-mute women with hearing husbands.

Principals of institutions for the deaf and dumb have personal knowledge of their pupils, and
may therefore be able to arrive at correct conclusions regarding the results of intermarriage.

It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for others to arrive at an independent conclusion
from the data published in the institution reports. It is even impossible to ascertain from these
reports the mere number of the deaf offspring recorded as born to the pupils. The nature of the
difficulty will be understood by an example. From the 1877 report of the American Asylum we
find that—

George W. A—— (born about 1803) “married a deaf-mute” and had 3 deaf children,

Mary R—— (born about 1808) “married a deaf-mute” and had 3 deaf children,

Jonathan M—— (born about 1814) “married a deaf-mute” and had 3 deaf children,

Paulina B—— (born about 1817) “married a deaf-mute” and had 3 deaf children.

Now the query presents itself, “how many deaf children were born to these pupils?” Perhaps
Mary R— was the wife of George W. A—, and Paulina B— the wife of Jonathan M—,
in which case there are only 6 deaf children in all. It is possible, however, that in such cases the
males and females were not related in marriage, and wpon this supposition there were 12 deaf
children. }

EN et a eR eT

22 MEMUIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENOES,

There is generally nothing in the institution reports to guide us to a solution of the problem.
If the names of the husbands and wives of the pupils were recorded it would be possible to arrive
at some conclusion. As it is, the most we can do is to ascertain the number of deaf children recorded
as the offspring of the male pupils and those noted as born to the female pupils, Even though it
were possible to arrive at a correct conclusion regarding the total number of deaf offepring recorded
in the reports, still we would not be able to ascertain the actual number of deaf children born to
the pupils. For it is obvious, from the following considerations, that the number recorded is so
much less than the number born as to lead to the inference that in a considerable proportion of
cases the deaf offspring are not recorded at all until some of the children make their appearance
in the institution as pupils. This means that they may not be recorded until 10, 20, or even 25
years after the date of their birth. I may be wrong in such a supposition, but I do not know how
otherwise to account for the imperfection of the records:

(1) In the 1877 report of the American Asylum the married male pupils were recorded to have
had 36 deaf children born to them and the married female pupils 28, Whereas 57 children of
deaf-mute marriages have already been admitted into the institution as pupils (November, 1883°),
all of whom were born before the 1877 report was issued. This does not include a number of deaf.
mutes who have been admitted into other institutions in New England whose parents were pupils
of the American Asylum, nor does it include children too young to be sent from home,

(2) In the 1882 report of the Illinois Institution the married male pupils were recorded to have
had 10 deaf children born to them and the married female pupils 8. Whereas 14 children have
already been admitted into the [linois Institution (November, 1883+) one or both of whose parents
were deaf,

(3) A comparison of the four reports of the American Asylum containing the statistics of the
institution shows that only a small proportion of the deaf offspring of the later marriages are
recorded in the 1877 report. This will be obvious from the following table:

TABLE XXVI.—Congenitally deaf pupils who married deaf-mutes.

Recorded number of | Recorded number of

Presumed date of mar- | Number of males : Number of females
' : seit deaf children born | | deaf children born
riage, married, to the males. | married. | to the females,

: aia ;
| Before 1843........... 18 4 | 17 il
| Between 1843 and 1857. 42 13 } 46 5
| Between 1857 and 1867. 22 « 30 1

Between 1867 and 1377. 38 os 26 ie |

* Deduced from a comparison of the four reports of the American Asylum, (See Introduction to Table X XIII.)

From this table it appears that 116 congenital deaf-mutes (males and females) have married
deaf-mutes since the 1857 report was issued and that only one deaf child resulted from these
marriages (!), This is most extraordinary, in view of the results obtained by Dr. Turner, which
were based upon the marriages of the pupils of the same institution, and we must conclude that
the records of the later marriages are defective so far as the deaf offspring are concerned.

An examination of the tables in the appendix shows that of all the'pupils of the American
Asylum and Illinois Institution 445 males and 371 females are recorded to have married. In the
445 families formed by the males there were (according to the reports) 46 deaf children, or 10.3
deaf children for every 100 families; and in the 371 families formed by the females there were 36
deaf children, or 9.7 in 100 families.

* Reported to the writer by Mr. Williams, the present principal of the institution,
t Reported to the writer by Dr, Gillett, the present principal of Illinois Institution.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE, 23

If we add together the total number of males and females reported to have married and the
total number of deaf children stated to have been born to them, we obtain the following figures :
816 individuals married, aud 82 deaf offspring. We cannot conclude from this that the records
indicate that 82 deaf children were born to the 816 pupils referred to, for many of the male papils
mentioned had undoubtedly married female deaf:inutes educated in the same institution with
themselves. In such cases the deaf offspring were probably recorded twice—once under the name , |
of the father and once under the name of the mother. If we desire to obtain, not the actual
number of deaf children recorded to have been born to the pupils, but the proportionate number,
we may safely add together the children recorded to have been born to the male and-female pupils;
for, if 816 families have 82 deaf children, the proportionate number of deaf children (10 for every f
100 families) is a mean between the results obtained from the marriages of the males and females
considered separately, and is more reliable than either from being based on larger numbers.
In che following tables this plan of addition has been adopted, and it must be remembered that
the number of families noted and the number of deaf children born, as deduced from the reports
of the American Asylum and Illinois Institution, must not be taken to indicate the actual number
of families formed by the pupils of these institutions, nor the actual number of deaf children born
tothem. They simply indicate a proportion, which is expressed in the third columy by a percentage.
If none of the males married females recorded in the same reports, then the figures in the
following tables would indicate actual as well as proportionate numbers; but this is not the case.

TABLE XXVII.—Proportion of deaf offspring resulting from the marriages of deaf-mutes.

(Deduced from the reports of the American Asylum and Illinois Institution, ]
Percentage (number

of deaf children to
every 100 families).

Number of deaf

Married couples. | Number of families. children.

Both parties deaf-mutes...........-.-- 654 66 10,1

One purty a deaf-mute............-.-- 162 16 99 |

One or both parties deaf-mutes.. .. 816 82 10.0

The following tables enable us to compare the above results with those obtained from each
institution, considered separately :

TABLE XXVIII.—Proportion of deaf offspring as deduced from reports of Illinois Institution and
American Asylum.

ILLINOIS INSTITUTION,

| Number of deaf Percentage (number

Married les. Number of families. hi lilea of deat children to
weron re js. SUaAaaD: every 100 families).
Both partic. Aeaf-mutes...... ....-.-- 152 | 17 11.2
One party a deaf-mute.........-.----- 22 1 | 4.5 | a
One or both parties deaf-mutes.. .. 174 18 10.3 }
AMERICAN ASYLUM.
$f ese eae ee ee
Both parties deaf-mutes..........----+! 502 40 9,8 |
One party a deaf-mute...........----- 140 15 10.1

One or both parties deaf-mutes.. -.| 642 64 10.0

24 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIHNCES,.

The percentages obtained indicate, of course, the number of deaf children for every 100 fam-
ilies as recorded in the reports, and not the actual number of deaf children for every 100 families
(which is known to be greater).

The general results obtained from the two institution reports are remarkably concordant.

In the case of the American Asylum, however, it appears that the pupils who married hearing
persons had a larger proportion of deaf children than those who married deaf-mutes(!) Such a
remarkable result requires explanation. The pupils assumed to have married hearing persons are
simply recorded in the report as “married,” but from private correspondence with the present
principal (M«. Williams) I find that in most, if not in all, cases so recorded the record is really
intended to indicate marriage with a hearing person. é ‘

Even in the case of the congenitally deaf pupils of the American Asylum it app. ws that
those who married hearing persons had a larger proportion of deaf offspring than those who mar-
ried deaf-mutes. The following table shows that this result can be deduced not only from the
tables in the appendix, but from the table quoted above from Dr. Turner’s paper on Hereditary
Deafness:

TABLE XXIX.

Dr. Turner’s results (1868)
for pupils of the Ameri-
can Asylum,

Results from 1877 report of
American Asylum,

t . Sa
' Set Bo '
: = 6 & = oP
. | sie F a 5
@ 2 2d 8 ° Lo
; . » — 5 a | =
Marriages of the congenitally deaf, is a bt a & a
; >} &
; : = s Ee Ei 8 ae
5 i zEs a i ples
a q 2D « S ~~ L
‘ ee tl - = te 2 ~2 3
os ors 5 Se 35 On.
| S * bh TS ) =) =
| E P goa | 3 P £38
Jf | i a Ph pal e a on
| j = 5 ess & 5 Bd gS
| = = me S = = a
= te = Che) Ss lad ore
oD | 4 4 a Zi 4 SB ag)

One parent congenitally deaf and the
| other a hearing person............-.
| 2 | Both parents deaf-mutes (one congen-
| | itally deaf and the other inciden-

CALV AGRE) sc.6 ss cciekee tas wexinesas> 56 6 10.7 (?) (?) (<b eee
3 | Both parents deaf-mutes (both con- .
| genitally deaf) ........ 2... .....--- 24 17 70.9 (?) (?) (?)
4*| Both parents deaf-mutes (one or both
congenitally deat) .........-......- 80 23 28.7 239 34 14,2

* Class 4 gives summation of classes 2 and 3.

I have already stated that in the majority of the cases that have fallen under my personal

observation where a deaf-mute was married to a hearing person that the hearing person belonged

to a family containing deaf-muies, and this is significant in the light of the results deduced above,
especially when we remember that the late Dr. Harvey L. Peet found that “the brothers and
sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to have deaf.mute children as the deat-mute himself, suppos-

ing each to marry into families that have or each into families that have not shown a predisposition

toward deaf-dumbness.” If we examine the cases of the pupils who are presumed to have married
hearing persons iu the light of this idea, separating the sporadic cases from those who have deaf-
mute relations, we obtain the following results:

We find from the tables in tle appendix that 162 deaf-mutes were “married,” presumably, to
hearing persons. Of these deaf-mutes o. are stated to have, had deaf-mute relatives, and they are
recorded to have had 15 deaf children, or more than 27 deaf children for every 100 families; on
the other hand, 107 of these deat:mutes were noted as sporadic cases, and only one deaf child is

recorded as the offspring of the marriages!

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 25

We have here a clear indication that a hereditary tendency towards deafness, as indicated by the
possession of deaf relatives, is a most important element in determining the production of deaf off
spring. The following table shows that it may even be a more important element than the mere fact of
congenital deafness in one or both of the parents.

TABLE XX X.—Deaf-mule offspring of deaf-mute marriages.

[Results deduced from the tables in the appendix, combining the figures obtained from the reports of the American
Asylum and Illinois Institution. ]

; mo 6| d HSA]
aa a eke
= |e | ees
| = be | 844 |
' =I § i at &
{ - Cs — ee |
Description of married couples, Day oe 5 cr |
i] oa ja |
| § |88p!
- a S75
& 5s Ee >
5 5 oOo |
a A Ay |
(1) Father known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause of | 4
father’s deafness is stated): | i
(a) Father recorded to be congenitally deaf ..........-..- Keshicwatereroenie 187 25 13.3 i
H (b) Father recorded to he non-congenitally deaf ...... 02.22. ...... .. ee eee 237 18 7.6 | a
(2) Mother known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause of 0
invther’s deafness is stated):
(a) Mother recorded to be congenitally veat...... 6.22. cece ee eee cece eee 173 | 3h 17.9
(b) Mother recorded to be non-congenitally deaf...... 2.2... ..-- 6. cece eee 179 4 2.9 |
(3) Father known to be a deaf-nute (summation of all such cases):
(a) Father known to have deaf-mute relatives . 2.2... 0.2... 2-2. cee eee eee 132 23 17.4 |
(b) Father recorded as a sporadic case 2.2... 02-22. cee eee cece cee eee eee 313 23 Rs
(4) Mother known to be a deat-mute (summation of all such cases) : |
(a) Mother known to have deaf-mute relatives .... 2.2.2. 0.2. -0.. cece eee eee 153 25 16.3
(b) Mother recorded as a sporadic case . 2... 2.2.2.6 eee eee eee eee eee ees 218 11 5.0 |
(5) One parent known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause
of deafness was stated): |
(a) Deaf-mute parent recorded to be congenitally deaf ..-...........---. -. 360 56 15.5 |
(b) Deaf-mute parent recorded to be nou-congenitally deaf ..............-- 416 22 5.3 |
(6) One parent known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases): |
(a) Deaf-mute parent known to have deaf-mute relatives .........-...----- 285 48 16.8 |
(b) Deaf-mute parent recorded as a sporadic Case ..-... 1.2.0. eee ee ee eee 531 34 6.4
(7) One parent recorded to be congenitally deaf (summation of all cases):
(a) Congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives........... 280 41 7.8
(b) Congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case ............-.----- 130 15 11.5
(8) One parent recorded to be non-congenitally deaf (summation of all cases) : ;
(a) Non-congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives. ...... 53 5 9.4 ,
(b) Non-congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case ..........---- 363 17 4.7 %
{ (9) Both parents known to be deaf-muates (summation of all cases): z
(a) One parent known to bave deaf-mute VOLMELVOR Gh stcege Gens cewaeedseene 230 33. 14.7
(b) One parent recorded as a sporadic case ......2. 622-2. .2 eee eee eee cnenees 424 33 7.8 | 4
(10) Both parents known to be deaf-mutes and one recorded as congenitally | | 4
deaf: ;
(a) Congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives. .......--- 186 | 7 14.5 | a
| (b) Congenitally deaf pareut recorded as a sporadic case ........---- peeene 112 15 13.4
| (11) Both parents known to be deaf-mutes, and one recorded as non-congenitally -
deaf: i
) (a) Non-congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute rolatives....--. 48 4 9.3 -
(b) Non-congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case .........----. 288 16 5.5
(12) One parent known to be a deaf:mute and the other presumed to be a hear-
pc? ing person (summation of all cases): f ‘ an b
(a) The deef-mute parent known to have deaf-mute relatives .........-.--- od 15 27.8
f (b) The deaf-mute parent recorded as a sporadic QASR oes ce es cbecetseseeeal: LOY 1 09 | }
1 (13) One parent recorded to be a congenital deaf-mute, the other presumed to be | |
a hearing person: i
1 (a) Songanitalty deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives. .......-.. 44 /i4 31.8 *
, : (b) Congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic Case .. 2... ..0. eee ee 18 None. (?) 2 | 4
° (14) One parent ite to be a non-congenital deaf-mute, the other presumed ts
to be a hearing person: i
(a) Non-congenital deatmnte parent known to have deaf-inute relatives. ... 10 | 1 10.0 A
(b) Non-congenital deaf-mute parent recorded as a sporadic case .....-...-- 75 1 13 | re
” | (15) General results (summation of all cases of marriage recorded) : d ij
| AVOTOQC . 26. cece cece cee ee eee eee ee ee cee e ee ene e cee ee sete teen eeee eee 816 82 10.0 ,
n

*The percentages are given as deduced from the institution reports, The true percentages are probably much
8 ; greater, but proportionally greater.
99 A—BELL——4

26 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

(a) The large proportion of deaf offspring resulting from marriages where the father was
known to have deaf-mute relatives, and from those where the mother was known to have deaf.
mute relatives, and the comparatively small proportion where either parent appeared to be free
from hereditary taint, seem to point to the conclusion that in a large proportion of cases in which
the marriages were productive of deaf’ offsnring both parents had deaf-mute relatives (even in the case
achere one parent was a hearing person).

(b) A similar process of reasoning leads to the conclusion that in a large proportion of
marriages where deaf offspring resulted both parents were probably congenitally deaf where both were
deaf-mutes, and one parent congenitally deaf where only one was a deaf-mute.

(c) It is thus highly probable that a large proportion of the deaf offspring of deaf-mute mar-
riages had parents who were both congenitally deaf, and who also both had deaf-mute relatives.

(d) Non-congenital deafness, if sporadic, seems little likely to be inherited.

(e) Another deduction we may make is that more of the deaf offspring whose parents had deay
relatives will marry than of those whose parents were recorded as sporadic cases, for there are more of
them; and they will have a greater tendency than the others to transmit their defect to the grandchil-
dren.

These results are in close accordance with the experience of the venerable principal of the
Pennsylvania Institution, as expressed in the following letter:

PENNSYLVANIA INSTITUTION FOR DEAF AND DuMB,

Philadelphia, November 14, 1883.
A. GRAHAM BELL, Esq. :

Dear Sir: Continued ill health has prevented an earlier compliance with your request of October 15. The list
I now send is full and accurate, according to the records of the institution and my recollection. In regard to most
of the cases, I know of no place where fuller information can be obtained than our books furnish.

A residence of more than forty years in this institution has afforded me abundant opportunity for observation
in regard to the subject of your research, A statement of the conclusions I have arrived at may be of some interest
and use to you.

In regard to the marriage of deaf mutes with each other, if both the man and the woman are deaf from birth,
there is very great danger—I should say a strong probability—that some of the offspring will be born deaf. I know
a family, however, where the mother is one of three congenitally deaf children and the father one of five, and the
seven children they have had are all without defect. In the list sent you all the parents, except in two cases, were
born deaf. In one of these two cases the father could hear; in the other the mother is a semi-mute.

Where both parents became deaf adventitiously, there seems to be no more probability of the offspring being born
deaf than there is where both parents hear.

Where only one of tle parents is congenitally deaf, ‘ne children almost always hear,

Any further information I can give will be furnished willingly.

Yours, respectfully,

JOSHUA FOSTER.

My attempts to deduce from the records of the marriages of the deaf the influences that
cause the production of deaf offspring have met with only partial success. Valuable indications
have been obtained, but precise and accurate results are unattainable, on account of imperfect
data. It occurred to me some time ago that a different method might lead to an exhaustive exam-
ination of the subject. It is known that few of the deaf and dumb married before the establish-
ment of educational institutions in this country, and nearly 78 per cent. of all the marriages re-
corded in the reports of the American Asylum (the oldest institution in the country), seem to have
been contracted since the year 1843. The probabilities are, therefore, that the vast majority of the
deaf offspring born are still living, and from them may be obtained an accurate account of their
ancestry. It also appeared probable that the majority of these deaf-mutes would at some period

THE FORMATION OCF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 27

of their lives, make their appearance in institutions for the deaf and dumb, and from the institution
records might be obtained their names and addresses. Such considerations as the above led me
to send to all the institutions in the country a circular letter of inquiry requesting the names and
addresses of all the pupils who had been admitted who had deaf-mute parents, and returns have
been received from a number of institutions.*

A starting point has thus been gained for a new investigation of the subject. The cases re
turned are sufficient in number to throw some light upon the proportion of deaf offspring born to
deaf-mutes as compared with the proportion born to the community at large. The total number
of deaf-mutes in the country, according to the recent census, is 33,878, which gives us a proportion
of one deaf:mute for every 1,500 of the population. If, then, the proportion of deaf-mutes, origi-
nating among the deaf-mutes themselves, were no greater than in the community at large, they
should constitute only 1 in 1,500 of the deaf-¢mute population. In other words, we should not
have more than 23 deaf-mutes in the United States who are themselves the children of deaf-mutes.
The returns received from the institutions, however, show that no less than 215 such children have
already been admitted as pupils into 35 of the 58 institutions of the country (23 institutions not re-
plying to my queries). Pupils are rarely admitted before they are 10 or 12 years of age and many
do not reach the institution until they are much older. Hence it is evideut that this number does
not at all express the total number of such cases in the United States. Even if we suppose that no
more than 230 such cases are to be found in the country, the proportion is ten times greater than in
the community at large, or 1 in 150. But when we consider that nearly all of these children were
born deaf, whereas nearly half of the deaf-mutes of the country (45.9 per cent.) became deaf from
accidental causes, we realize that the liability to the production of congenital deaf-mutes is more
nearly twenty times that of the population at large than ten times. It is evident that whatever
may be the actual number of deaf-mutes in the country who have one or both parents deaf, the true
number is much greater than that assumed above. From which it follows tbat the liability to the
production of deaf offspring is also greater. While, then, we cannot at present arrive at any per.
centage, it is certain that the proportion of deaf-mute offspring born to deaf-mutes is many times greater
than the proportion born to the people at large.

*See Tables S, T, U, and W of the Appendix. My best thanks are due to the principals and superintendents for
their assistance in this investigation,

me "ae = ae an

>
a

Shae eee

eran pea So ele iabniayto eT

ae eee

Son oe

ee RNTS

vale tiratie A Nance RA ae les eT

p
|
b
:
:
|
4

st wt

Wess Tor

CHAPTER IV.

FAMILIES OF DEAF-MUTES.

The reports of the American Asylum, New York, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois Institutions
show that in each institution deaf-mutes have been received who belong to families containing
five, six, or even more deaf-mutes ; and there is abundance of evidence to indicate that such fam-
ilies are very numerous in the United States. In cases where there are five or six children of one
family deaf and dumb some of them marry when they grow up, and in many cases they marry
persons who belong, like themselves, to families containing several deaf-mutes. Thus it happens
that we have here and there, scattered over the country, groups of deaf-mute families counected
together by blood and marriage.

The probability is very strong that the deaf mute children of deaf-mute marriages will at
soine time or other make their appearance in the educational institutions of the country, aud we
might reasonably hope to be able to trace the family relations from the published reports of the
institutions. Unfortunately, in the majority of cases, the information that can be gleaned in this
way is very fragmentary and uncertain, for the names of the husbands and wives of the pupi!s are
rarely quoted, so that it is impossible in the great majority of cases to trace the connections. A
femaie deaf-mute, when she marries, changes her name to that of her husband; the new name is
not recorded iu the institution reports, and we lose track of her branch of the family. Should she
have deaf offspring they make their appearance in the institution under another family name, and
the connection is not obvious. So far as my researches have gone they indicate the probability
of a connection by blood or marriage between many of the largest of the deaf-mute families of
the New England States.

In the following diagram (Fig. 1) I exhibit the results of an attempt to trace the connections
of the Brown family, of Henniker, N. H., in which there are known to be at least four generations
of deaf-mutes.

O Indicates a hearing and speaking person.

@ Inilicates a deaf-mute.

= Indicates marriage.

Fic. 1.—The Brown family of Henniker, N. H., and a few of its connections.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE, 29

The Brown family, of Henniker, N. H.—The ancestor of this family was one of the early
pioneers of New Hampshire. He left Stowe, in Massachusetts, somewhere about the year 1787,
and settled in Henniker, N. H.

His deaf-mute son Naham (born in 1772) married a hearing lady, by whom he had a son and
daughter, both deaf and dumb. His son Thomas, when he entered the American Asylum as a
pupil, was recorded to have had “an aunt and two cousins deaf and dumb.” (This branch of the
family has not yet been certainly identified.) Thomas married a deaf-mute (Mary Smith, of Chil-
mark, Mass.), by whom he had two children, Thomas L. (a deaf-mute) and a hearing daughter who
died young. The son Thomas L., married a hearing lady (Almira G. Harte, of Burlington, Vt.), and
removed to Michigan, where he becaine one of the teachers of the Michigan Institution for the Deaf
and Dumb. I have no information concerning his descendants.

The deaf mute daughter ot Nahum married a hearing gentleman, Mr. Bela M. Swett, of Hen-
niker, N. H., by whom she had three sons (Thomas B., William B., and Nahum), The eldest son,
Thomas, was born deaf; the second son, William, was born deaf in one ear, and lost the hearing
of the other in childhood from measles; and the third son, Nahum, could hear. The eldest son,
Thomas, married a deaf-mute, and his three children (Mitchell, Charlotte E., and Mary 8.) are
deaf-mutes. The second son, William, married a deaf-mute (Margaret Harrington) by whom he
had five children, all of whom could hear at birth, but two of them (Persis H. and Lucy Maria)
lost their hearing so early in life as to necessitate their education in institutions for the deaf and
dumb. Two others died young and one has retained her hearing into adult life. The eldest
daughter (Persis, born 1852) has married a deaf-mute. It will thus be seen that three families
of deaf-mutes have sprung from Nahum Brown, and in two of these the deafness has descended
to the fourth generation. In the other family it descended to the third generation, beyond which
I have been unable to trace the family. The deaf-mute connections of the Brown family have only
been partially worked out.

1. The wife of William B. Swett was Margaret Harrington, who had a deaf-mute brother,
Patrick, who married a deaf-mute (Sarah Worcester), who had a twin deat-mute brother (Frank), who
married a deaf-mute (Almira Huntington), who had a deaf-mute sister (Sophia M.), who married a
deaf-mute (James R. Hines).* Frank Worcester, one of the twin deaf-mutes has a deaf-mute son—
the other twin (Susan) has a child who hears.

2. On the other side of the family, the wife of Thomas Brown (Mary Smith, of Chilmark,
Martha’s Vineyard) had a hearing brother (Capt. Austin Smith), who had two deaf-mute children
(ason anda daughter). The son (Freeman N.) married adeaf-mute (Deidama West).t Mrs. Brown
also had a deaf-mute sister (Sally), who ‘‘ married a hearing man of Martha’s Vineyard (Harift
Mayhew) who had 5 deaf-mute brothers and sisters.”

The Lovejoy family.—This is another New England family in which deafness has been handed
down through four generations. Benjamin Lovejoy, a deaf-mute, of Sidney, Me., is recorded in

“ The father and mother of James R. Hines (Isaac and Sophia) were both deaf-mutes, and he has a deaf-mute
son (Eddie), and a cousin deaf and dumb. His mother (Sophia Rowley) also has a deaf-mute cousin,

t They had a deaf-mute daughter (Lovina). Deidama West had a deaf-mute mother, Deidama (Tilton) West, and two
maternal uncles deaf and dumb (Franklin and Zeno Tilton) who married deaf-mutes. She also had three brothers aud
one sister deaf and dumb (George, Benjamin, Joseph L., and Rebecca). George married a deaf-mute (Sabrina Rogers),
and has a deaf-mute child (Eva 8. West), Benjamin married a hearing lady (Mary Hathaway). I have no informa-
tion concerning their offspring. Rebecca married a deaf-mute (Eugene Trask), who had a deaf-mute brother (John
Trask) who married a deaf-mute. George Trask, deaf-mute, born about 1880, is ‘probably the son of Eugene

Trask and Rebecca West.

a

ee a ee

‘
¢
%
4

STOR Ee Ec MORSE OE ELE 12 CN

a *:
Pai ye etarr mies Tents

30 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

the reports of the American Asylum to have had “a grandfather, father, and 3 children deaf and
dumb.” There are other families of deaf-mutes of the same name which are obviously connected.
(See Fig. 7.)

The Ouat family, of Iltinois.—Two members of this family ontered the Tilinois Institution in
1859 and 1862. It was recorded of them in the 1882 report that there had been deafness in the
family for five generations. No particulars, however, are given.

O Indicates a hearing person.
@ Indicates a deaf-mute.
= Indicates marriage.

land; " Hoagland,
i Pein sant aa ( Gallitin Co. Branch.)

(No information concerning
the descendants) '

(Wo information

conce the
descendatte)

Fic, 2.—The Hoagland family of Kentucky.

The Hoagland family, of Kentucky (Fig. 2.)—This is one of the most remarkable of the deaf-mute
families of America. In the above diagram I have attempted to show the family connections
so far as they are known to me. In 1853 this family was stated to consist of a father, himself deaf
and dumb, with 7 deaf-mute children. He had 2 deaf-mute nephews, one of whom was married
and had two deaf-mute children. He also had a hearing sister who had two deaf-mute sons, one
of whom had 3 children, all deaf-mutes.*

The principal of the Kentucky Institution has kindly furnished me with the following addi-
tional particulars concerning this family. He says:

‘*In 1822 two brothers, Thomas and William Hoagtand, entered our institution. Thomas
never married, but William married a deaf:mute. He had ason and two daughters, ali of whom
were mutes and married mutes, Jesse, the son, has five children, all of whom can hear. Mrs.
Blount, the eldest daughter, has one son, a mute; Clara, the other daughter, is: childless. This
may be called the Lexington branch, as their home was there. Another, the Gallatin Co: uty
branch, contained seven deaf-mutes. In another branch, the Reeds, the father and his three
children are mutes. Only a part of all these mutes have been at school, and it is difficult to trace
n the scanty records the exact relationship between the different branches.”

The Adkins family, of Kentucky.—This family was stated in 1853 to contain nine deaf-mutes.t

The Grisson family, of Kentucky.—I am indebted to the principal of the Kentucky Institution
for the following very instructive particulars concerning this family:

“There were three or four deaf-mute brothers and sisters of this family who were pupils here
(Kentucky Institution) about the year 1828; one of them, William, married a deaf-mute lady and

* American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. vi, p. 255.
t American Annals of the Deaf aad Dumb, vol. vi, p. 256.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 31

had a numerous family, all of whom could hear. One of his sons married his cousin, also a hearing
person, and all of their five children are deaf.mutes.”

In 1870 Mr. Benjamin Talbot, then principal of the Iowa Institution, published in the American
Annals of the Deaf and Dumb (vol. xv, p. 118) an account of some families of deaf-mutes residing
in his State, One or two of the most remarkable cases may be noted which are of a particularly
suggestive character.

O Indicates n hearing person.
@ Indicates a deaf-mute.

The Lurber Family
0

Towa.

relatives in Indiana

(Father had. day and. demb

(No information concerning the descendante)

Fia, 3.—The Lurber family of Towa.

The Lurber family, of Iowa (Fig. 3).—“The father is a deaf-mute, without education, who came
to Iowa from Indiana, where there are, or have been, several deaf-mute relatives. Of twelve
children in this family only one, and she the eighth, was born deaf. Four others, the fourth, fifth,
sixth, and ninth, have lost their hearing in whole or in part, and have been sent to school here
(Iowa Institution).”

© Indicates a hearing person.

© Indicates a partially deaf person.
@ Indicates n deaf-mute.

=: Indicates marriage.

ifs the brothers and
sisters became deaf,
or hard of heart

Nearly itive. ws

(Wo information concerning the descendants.)

Fic. 4.—The Huston family of Iowa.

The Huston family, of Iowa (Fig. 4).—“ There have been ten children in this family, of whom
the third and eighth lost their hearing by disease, while the sixth, ninth, and tenth were born deaf.

26 LE RRR EA AN EY TSN ELE AOL LAAT DG PAE IER INS
7

asa

eee

32 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

Mr. Hustoun’s grandmothers were sisters, and the grandfather and grandmother of this family were

first consins, Mr. Huston’s brothers, like himself, were healthy and long lived, but, like him, they

all became deaf, or at least hard of bearing, comparatively erly in life.”

(4 information concerning the)
descendants,

No information concer
( the iascendants: aor

@ Indica‘es a deaf-mute.

c= Indicates marriage.

Fic. 5.—The Fullerton family of Hebron, N. Y.

The Fullerton family, of Hebron, N. Y. (Fig. 5).—Sayles Works, born 1806 (a presumed con-
genital deaf-mute of the New York Institution), married Jane Fullerton, born 1806 (a congenital
deat-mute educated in the same institution), who had six brothers and sisters deaf and dumb.
All of their six children were deaf and dumb. There were thus fourteen deaf-mutes in this family.

I have no information concerning the descendants.

© Indicates a hearing person
@ Indicates a deaf-mute.
== Indicates marriage.

(Harrison)

(Arnold) (Wyckoff) (Williams.)

(No information
concerning the
descendants)

Fic, 6.—A family indicated in the 1854 report of the New York institution.

A remarkable family reported from the New York Institution for the Deaf and Dumb.—The
particulars of this family, as gleaned from the 1854 report of the New York Institution, are shown
in the above diagram (Fig. 6): As the descent is in the female line, this genealogical table could
not have been made had it not been for the fact that the New York report gives the names of the

husbands and wives of some of the papils.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE,

The Alten Family,
of Hartford ; Me.
Elev vlher reli tives deaf and dumb.
& ©00002300000

Repecea ALLEN, admitted to American Asylum in 1825, aged 21 years.
She is recorded as having ‘two brothers, two sisters, and eleven other
relatives deaf and dumb,” and te have ‘married a deaf-mute.”

The Lovejoy Family The Lovejoy Famt The Lovejoy Fa
of Payette Me. of Si ray, Me. ” of Corcard, H ;

?/

The LoveJsoys of New Hampshire are here grouped with the Lovmsoys
of Maine, although we have no certain evidence that they are connected.

The Rowe Family, The Curtis Family,
of New Gloucester, Ma. f of Leeds, Me.
5 deaf-mutes inthe family

(7 deaf-mutes ina family. 5 married to deaf-mutes) \\4 married to deaf-mutes; |}

The Hogers Family, The Wakefleld Family,
of Freeport, Me. of Gardiner, Me.

? The Small Family,

of West Danville, Me,

( Seven relatives
> deaf and dumb)

(other relatives.) ee0eee0@
ee0

Estuk&r WAKRFIELD, admitted 1448,
aged 11 years; had ‘one sister, one
uncle, three cousins, aud other rela-
tives deat and diimb.”

The Seiders Family, The Williamson Family, The Jack Family,
of Waldobora,Me. of Northport, Me. of Jackson, Me.
ExMa SripEns, admitted 1858, aged ; A Sttad 1Rk
9 veaie| shalt Wenautor tis brother, Erra J, WILLIAMSON, admitted 1859, Dunpak Jack, admitted 1858,

aged 8 yrs; had “two brothers,
two uncles. and two cousins
deaf and dumb.”

one uncle, one cousin, deaf and dumb.” aged 11 years: had ‘two uncles and
three cousins deaf and dumb,” and she
married a deaf-mute,

Fic. 7.—A group of deat-mute families from Maine.

99 A—BELL 5

33

i
:
4
i

34 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES,

A group of deaf-mute families from Maine-—Members of the deaf-mute families shown in Fig.
7 have been admitted into the American Asylum at Hartford, Conn, There is no record showing
any relationship between the families, but their close proximity to one another is extremely sug-
gestive. The fact that there are four generations of deaf-mutes in the Lovejoy fumily suggests
the idea that some of the other families may perhaps be descended from it through the female line,
Whatever the explanation, it is at all events remarkable that so many large deaf-mute families
should have originated in small places within a few miles of one another.

It must not be supposed that I have attempted to give an exhaustive list of the large deaf.
mute families. I have simply given specimen cases to prove that in many different parts ot the
country deafness has been transmitted by heredity. There are many more large families known
to me which are not alluded to above.

ie om

CHAPTER V.
UPON THE GROWTH OF THE DEAF-MUTE POPULATION,

The full returns of the 1880 census, so far as regards the deaf and dumb, have not yet been
published; but, as stated before, Rev. Frederick H. Wines, who had charge of this department of
the census, presented to the tenth convention of American instructors of the deaf and dumb the
results of an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-inutes reported in the census returns. The tables
presented by Mr. Wines have been reproduced in the Appendix. (See Tables N, O, P, Q.)

It will be observed that the vases are classified according to the period when deafness occurred
and according to the cause of deafness (whether congenital or not), I have rearranged these cases
into decades, so as to correspond with the classification of the pupils of the American Asylum
and Illinois Institution, and have represented the results graphically in the following diagram:

GEGSE

Fia. 8.—Relation between the congenital and non-congenital deaf-mutes of the country, according to the Rev. Fred. H. Wines.
The congenital deaf-mutes are indicated by the dark line; the non-congenital, by the light line.

Qn

35

pens Pm 8

ei ae

A er dD a HN ERIE

i
:
,
4
'
,
i
:
i
;

36 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOILENOES,

The ordinates of the curves represent, respectively, the number of congenital and non-con-
genital deaf-mutes who became deaf in the decades indicated by the abscissw, In the case of the
congenital deaf-mutes the ordinates also represent the number who were born in the decades given,
but this is not true of the non-congenitals. It will be observed that the number of deat-mutes re-
turned who became deaf in the last decade, 1871-80, is less than the number who became deaf in
the preceding decade, This does not necessarily mean that the number actually was less, bat more
probably indicates that the returns for the last decade are imperfect. Mr. Wines says that “In
proportion to the degree of their youth the younger deaf-mutes are not enumerated, Fewer deaf:
mutes who are babes in arms are enumerated than at the age of three years, and fewer at three
years than at seven, The apparent maximum at seven is not the actual maximum; the actual
maximum is at some younger age not yet ascertained.”

In the above diagram those portions of the curves that are believed to be unreliable trom this
cause are indicated by dotted lines,

It will be observed that among the older deaf mutes the congenitals are more numerous than
the non-congenitals; whereas among the younger the reverse appears to be the case, There is no
apparent diminution in the numbers of the congenitally deat born of late years; and the reversal
of the relation between the two classes must be attributed to an abnormal increase in the number
of those who became deaf from disease or accident. It looks as if a wave of deafuess-producing
disease had swept over the continent about the time of the late civil war,

ISIO—TSII
T830—AS39
ISSO—ISS9I
1860—I1869
1840—1849

714

Fic. 9.—The dark lines indicate those pupils who were horn deaf, and the light lines those who became deaf from disease or accident.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE, 37

There are indications also of'a similar though less disturbance in the numbers of those who
lost their hearing from disease during the decade 1811 to 1820, An examination of the reports of
the American Asylum and Illinois institution may throw light upon the nature of these disturb-
ances. By classifying the pupils of these institutions according to their period of birth, we obtain
the results that are exhibited graphically in the foregoing diagram (Fig. 9).

The apparent decrease in the number of pupils born in the last two decades is susceptible of
simple explanation. Very few pupils are received into institutions for the deaf aud dumb before
they are ten or twelve years of age, while it is not uncommon for pupils to he admitted at twenty
or twenty-five years of age or even older,

A pupil born in the year 1869 would only be 13 years of age in 1882 (the date of the Illinois
report). It is evident, therefore, that of those deaf-mutes who were born in the decade 1860 to
1869 who will ultimately make their appewrance in the Hlinois institution all had not been received
at the date of the report.

A similar explanation can be given in the case of the American Asylum, The dotted lines
indicate those portions of the curves which are known to be inaccurate on this account.

In regard to the American Asyluin the abnormal increase in the number of pupils who became
deaf from disease or accident who were born during the decade 1810-19 is very marked. Another
abpormal increase is observable in the number of those who became deaf in the decade 186069.
Indeed, the relations of the congenital and non-congenital deaf-mutes are reversed in a similar
manner to that shown in Fig. 8. In regard to the Illinois pupils (see Fig. 9) it will be observed
that the increase in the numbers of the non-congenitally deaf is so enormous, that of the pupils who
were born in the decade 1860-69 there were more than three times as many non-congenitally deaf
as there were congenitally deaf, and of those born in 1870~79 more than four times, whereas the
census returns show that more than half of all the deaf-mutes living in this country (1880) were
born deaf,

In the reports of the American Asylum and Illinois institutions the year when each pupil was
admitted and his age when admitted are noted, with few exceptions. From these elements the
period of birth has been calculated. The period when hearing was lost has also been ascertained
in all cases where the age of the pupil when deafness occurred is stated in the report.

In tables K and L of the Appendix the ton-congenital pupils of both institutions are class-
ified according to the period when hearing was lost and according to the disease that caused
deafness. In regard to the Illinois report it is unfortunately the case that the age of the pupil
when deafness occurred is not stated in 327 cases out of 947, so that we are only able to classify
about two-thirds of the cases in this way. The results are shown graphically in the upper dia-
grams of Fig. 10.

From the tables in the Appendix we have clear evidences of two epidemics of “spotted fever,”*
or epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis. One epidemic during the decade 1810 to 1819, reaching a
maximum in the year 1815, and the other (a great epidemic) in the decade 1860 to 1869, continuing
in the last decade, 1870 to 1879.

The pupils who became deaf from cerebro-spinal meningitis and from scarlet fever are clas-
sified according to the period when deafness occurred in the lower diagrams of Fig. 10.

The numbers of the non-congenitally deaf are evidently subject to great and sudden fluctuations on
account of epidemical diseases which cause deafness, whereas the growth of the congenitally-deaf popula-
tion seems to be much more regular.

“According to Dr. Russell Reynolds ‘‘spotted!fever” is apopular name for epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis.
See ‘‘A System of Medicine,” 1880, Vol. I, pp. 296-7.

t
i
i
3

SSS ee

ee SORA EE A GP ESI SoH lh mn TTR Bee Sh tc ae

al

nae

| oS 6281 — 0281
Pa
698L—O98T | GOST -O98T

le cal

0581 —OL8T
6z8t —0z8k “ae

\

MY OF SOIENOKS.

A]
a

6821 —O82E 6921 —O8Z1

628-0253

e

iFie. 10.

60st—o9s: 6981 —O98E

| 6¢8E —Of8E 6581 - OS6L

EREEEEEEEEEEEE)

6481 — OFSL

6581 — 0861 | GEST — OF8I

6281 — Ozer = foo | 6291 —O28E

Isl — 0181 ; Ty ae : 6191 — O18L

6081 —008T 608-0081

tae at

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADI

6641—O064L - 6641-0621

R : endny fo-oy
syeRPgeyyssys sigs

Gerebro Spi hal

38

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 39

In Table T of the Appendix I have classified 215 cases of deaf-mutes who are the off-spring
of deaf-mutes according to their period of birth, separating those who have one parent deaf from
those who have both. The results are shown graphically in Fig. 11.

a ey ee
|_| Dealemutt offepring |
Lat

1821-1830
i Ses SEES aS
4
/
ae ee

one parent | both parents
i aoe
6

=

NM having | N? having

Fia, 11.—The dark line indicates the deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf. The lower light line represents those who have one parent
deaf, and the upper line the total number of deaf-mutes returned who have one or both parents deaf.

No deaf-mute having both parents deaf has been returned who was born before the year 1832.
It seems probable, therefore, that the oldest deaf-mute in the country whose parents were both
deaf-mutes is only now a little past middle age. We have therefore received into our institutions
only the first generation of deaf-mutes born from the intermarriage of deaf-mutes. The apparent
decrease in the number born since 1861 does not necessarily indicate a real decrease, for many of
the deaf-mutes born in the decade 1861 to 1870 have not yet been admitted to institutions for the
deaf and dumb. Those portions of the curves that we know to be unreliable from this cause

are represented in dotted lines.
In concluding this portion of my subject it may be well to institute a comparison between the
deaf-mute population and the total population of the country as returned by the census of 1880.

ee a aa

SERS

‘

40 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

In Table U of the Appendix I have classified the people of the United States according to the
decades in which they were born, and have reduced the number burn in each decade to a percent-
age of the whole. In the same table I have classified the 12,154 congonital deaf-mutes mentioned
by Mr. Wines in a similar’ manner, and also the deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf-mutes.
We can thus examine upon the same scale the distribution of the three classes according to age.
The results are shown graphically in the diagram, Fig. 12.

The ordinates represent the percentage of the whole who were born in the decades indicated
by the abscisse.

If we assume that the numerical relation now existing between congenital deaf-mutes and
hearing persons of the same age approximately represents the proportion of the congenitally deaf
to the whole population born at the period when they were born, we have a means of comparing
the growth of the congenitally deaf population with that of the population at large.

Lhe indications are vhat the congenital deaf-mutes of the county are increasing at a greater rate
than the population at large; and the deaf-mute children of deaf-mutes at a greater rate than the con-
genital deaf-mute population.

ie
u

now

| te |

a

=e ce 2eoe eases

Hi i ME ATL } I An

t Javseiereeteeette
] nt f ri ran pitt Tan HT

1 ++ +44) (3 PSE ABERT AAI AUT PER HOA :

it 4 Hi { i AY FRA) LA

TT
|
Hap

Beit a a a HM TH
hy a ea fT HET Wy "i H
KA Hi {itt ! NUM HHTN Hae | a HA HY ATH
rT T eT TSA TTT
i | | ! A it

i
:
ich

SHG MN
ea

me

SE
AA
TT
A
A
SE
a
A
Ane
Se

~ ili}
me LALA OC
iit ii

I
re)
Oo
oO

S. MIS, 110.

Fic, 12.

40 ——— = a tS
oo (eee
======= =sau=see
—— SSS SS SS SS SSS
SSS SS >= ES Se Se SSS
SS 2 Se See ee
SSS SSeS =
.=S=== 222 SS 2S
——— = oes
a
SSS == = = SS = |S =
== SS SS SS SSE : LEGEND.—Distribution according to age (1) of the whole population of | ==
gO _. : the United States, (2) of the congenital deaf mute population, and (3) of ==
deaf mutes who are the children of deaf mutes.
The ordinates of the curves represent the percentage of the whole who |
were born in the decades indicated by the abscisse.
represents population of the United States.
—— —— —— —— represents congenital deaf mutes of the United States. |
> = ee SS SS SS SS Se ee represents deaf mutes who are the children of deaf
mutes,
. represents portion of the curves known to be unreliable
on aceount of incomplete returns,
20 = SSS SS SS SS SS SS =e + =
= eae =eeoeeeee
=e ———— === Se
SSS Sa PS] E
15 Se SSS SSS SS SS SS
——
==
SS
SSS SS ae
22S SSS SS
10 SSS SS = SS SS Se
=e SSe emer
Seageaene
SSS =
———
SSS eae
SS
SSS Ss
=S2sS8—222-
SSS aS 22>
ae ee ee
Ss
= SS ee ee eee
= SS SS SS Se ==
Pos ae | = SS pore a Saat
eater © SS SS eae eae SS SSS ES =
1771-1780 1781-1790 1771-1800 1811-1820 1821—1830

S. MIS. 110, 1,48.

1
i

TAT
uM |

cc

yhole population of
pulation, and (3) of

e of the whole who SS

id. States.
the United States. |
e children of deaf

mn HO
A

Mh

ANNA EN

it lil
i

pwn to be unreliable

nn

i
cae

{iii

Hi

:
Le

i
ci

:

|

TNT

==

2555 SUS SS SSS

SESS

————— =
ouumesneen = = >> = == = SS :
1821—1830 1831-1840 1841-1850 1851-1860 1861-1870 1871 — 1880

CHAPTER VI.

UPON THE CAUSES THAT DETERMINE THE SELECTION OF THE DEAF BY THE DEAF IN MARRIAGE.

’ In the preceding chapters I have shown that sexual selection is at work among the deaf and
dumb, tending to produce a deaf variety of the human race.

Those who believe as I do, that the production of a defective race of human beings would be
a great calamity to the world, will examine carefully the causes that lead to the intermarriages of
the deaf with the object of applying a remedy.

It is a significant fact that “before the deaf and dumb were educated comparatively few of
them married”;* and intermarriage (if it existed at all) was so rare as to be practically unknown.
This suggests the thought that the intermarriages of the deaf and dumb have in some way been
promoted by our methods of education. When we examine the subject from this point of view a
startling condition of affairs becomes apparent.

Indeed, if we desired to create a deaf variety of the race, and were to attempt to devise
methods which should compel deaf-mutes to marry deaf-mutes, we could not invent more complete
or more efficient methods than those that actually exist and which have arisen from entirely
different and far higher motives.

Let us, then, consider how we might proceed to form a race of deaf-mutes, if we desired so to do,
and let us compare the steps of the process with those that have been adopted by philanthropists
and others, from the purest and most disinterested motives, to ameliorate the condition of the
deaf and dumb. How would we commence?

1. With such an object in view, would it not be of importance to separate deaf-mutes from
hearing persons as early in life as possible and make them live together in the same place, care-
fully guarding them from the possibility of making acquaintances among hearing persons of their
own age? This is what we do. We take deaf children away from their homes and place them in
institutions by the hundred, keeping them there from early childhood to the commencement of
adult life.

2. It would also be of importance to promote social intercourse among them in adult life, so that
the boys and girls of former years should meet again as men and women. We might, for instance,
hold periodical reunions of former pupils at the institutions. This again is what we do.

Indeed, the graduates of our institutions now commonly organize themselves into societies or
associations for the promotion of social intercourse in adult life. Societies of deaf-mutes are to be
found in all large cities and in many of the smaller ones. Rooms are hired in a central locality,
which become the rendezvous of the deaf-mutes of the neighborhood. After the business of the
day is done, the deaf-mutes of the city meet together for social intercourse and on Sundays for
public worship. Not only do local societies exist, but there are State associations for promoting
social intercourse between the deaf-mutes of a State. Periodical conventions are held in Gimepent

* See “The Causes of Deafness,” by the Rev. Ww. w. Tainer, American Annals of the | Deaf and Dumb, ‘Noh i, p. 32,
99 A—BELL——6 41

\"

42 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENCES.

parts of the State, attended by deaf-mutes of both sexes. At these meetings they amuse them-
selves in various ways. Sometimes they hold fairs; have theatrical representations in dumb
show, spectacular tableaux, dancing, &e.

Not only do these State associations exist, but a National Association has been formed for
the purpose of promoting social intercourse between the scattered deaf-mutes of the country. The
Second National Convention of Deaf-Mutes met only a short time ago in New York, and was
attended by hundreds of deaf-mutes from all parts of the United States.

3. Another method calculated to foster class-feeling among the deaf and dumb would be to
provide them with newspapers and periodicals of their own, which should make a specialty of
“personals” relating to the deaf and dumb—newspapers that should give full accounts of the deaf:
mute conventions and reunions, and keep their readers informed of the movements of deaf-mutes,
their marriages, deaths, &c. Quite a number of such newspapers have come into existence;* the
majority being supported by the educational institutions of the country, with the benevolent object
of teaching the deaf:mutes the art of printing. These papers, I understand, are generally edited
and printed in the institutions, under the superintendence of the teachers. It was only natural
to include among the items “personals” concerning former pupils, and that former pupils of the
institution should take pleasure in reading them. In addition to the periodicals printed in the
institutions, others have appeared edited and managed by adult deaf-mutes not connected with
any institution. These latter papers became the organs of communication between the adult deaf:
mutes, and were affiliated with the conventions and associations above referred to.

4, The methods specified above, while they serve to facilitate social intercourse between adult
deaf-mutes, do not necessarily prevent them from also associating with hearing persons. As there
are 1,500 hearing persons for every one deaf-mute, it seems difficult to formulate any plan which
would restrict their choice of partners in life to deaf-mutes alone or to the hearing members of
deaf-mute families. Let us consider how this could be accomplished.

What more powerful or efficient means could be found than to teach the deaf-mutes to think
in a different language from that of the people at large? This is what we do. In the majority
of our institutions for the deaf and dumb a special language is used as the vehicle of thought,
a language as different from English as French or German or Russian. The English language is
confined to the school-room, and is simply taught asa school exercise, much as French and German
are taught in the public schools.

The deaf-mutes think in the gesture language, and English is apt to remain a foreign tongue.
They can communicate with hearing persons by writing, but they often write in broken English, as a

\ )foreigner would speak. They think in gestures, and often translate into written English with the
\?\

idioms of the sign language. The constant practice of the sign language interferes with the mas-
‘tery of the English language, and it is to be feared that comparatively few of the congenitally deaf
are able to read books understandingly unless couched in simple language. They are thus ina
great measure cut off from our literature. This is another element in forcing them into each other's
society. They are able to understand a good deal of what they see in our daily newspapers,
especially if it concerns what interests them personally, but the political speeches of the day, the
leading editorials, &c., are often beyond their knowledge of the English tanguage.

*These must not be confounded with the American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, a journal of a very different
character, not intended to be read specially by deaf-mutes themselves. This journal is a quarterly magazine, devoted
to the discussion cf subjects connected with the education of the deaf and dumb, and forms the official organ of com-
munication between teachers. It is one of the most admirably conducted special journals in existence, and contains
within its pages almost the complete literature of the world relating to the education of the deaf and dumb,

a

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 43

5. Another method of consolidating the deaf and dumb into a distinct class in the community
would be to reduce the sign-language to writing, so that the deaf-mutes would have a common
literature distinct from the rest of the world. Such a species of writing would constitute a form
of ideography like the Egyptian hieroglyphics. This, I understand, has already been accomplished
by the late Mr. George Hutton, of Ireland, afterwards principal of the InstituZion for the Deaf and
Dumb in Halifax, Nova Scotia.* The full publication of his method was prevented by his prema-
ture death; but a committee was appointed by the Indianapolis Convention of American Instruct:
ors of the Deaf and Dumb, to act in conjunction with his successor and son, Mr. J. Scott Hutton,
to attempt the recovery of the system from the posthumous papers of Mr. George Hutton. I have
not yet seen the report of the committee,

6. Another and very powerful method of obstructing intercourse with hearing persons and
compelling deaf-mutes to associate exclusively with one another would be to disseminate through-
out the community incorrect ideas concerning the deaf and dumb, so that people should avoid and
even fear them. The growth of erroneous ideas is favored by collecting deaf-mutes into institu-
tions away from public observation. People rarely see a deaf-mute, aud their information con-
cerning them is chiefly derived from books and periodicals.

~~ Whatever the cause, it is certainly the case that adult deat-mutes are sometimes hampered by

the instinctive prejudices of hearing persons with whom they desire to have business or social re-
lations. Many persons have the idea they are dangerous, morose, ill-tempered, &c. Then again
people do not understand the mental condition of a person who cannot speak and who thinks in
gestures. He is sometimes looked upon as a sort of monstrosity, to be stared at and avoided.
His gesticulations excite surprise and even sometimes alarm in ignorant minds. In connection
with this subject I may say that as lately as 1857 a deaf-mute was shot dead in Alabama by a
man who was alarmed by his gestures.t In fact fallacies concerning the deaf and dumb are so
common as to touch us all and to suggest the advisability of zmarignaly examining the fundamental
ideas we hold concerning them. -__

I have elsewhere discussed the subject of “Fallacies concerning the deaf wf And the influence

of these fallacies in preventing the amelioration « ‘of tl their condition,” ‘and shall not therefore en-
large upon the subject here. I shall simply give a few of the conclusions at which [ arrived in the
paper referred to.}

“1, Those whom we term ‘deaf-mutes’ have no other natural defect than that of deafness.
They are simply persons who are deaf from childhoud, and many of them are only ‘hard of hearing,’

“2, Deaf children are dumb not on account of lack of hearing, but of lack of instruction. No
one teaches them to speak.

“3. A gesture-language is developed by a deaf child at home, not because it is the only form
of language that is natural to one in his condition, but because his parents and friends neglect to
use the English language in his presence in a clearly visible form.

“4, (a) The sign-language of our institutions is an artificial and conventional language derived
from pantomime.

“(b) So far from being natural either to deaf or hearing persons, it is not understood by deat
enlidnon on their entrance to an institution. Nor do leaving persons become suiticlonply familiar

z See Mr. “Hatton's 3 | article U! “Upon the Practicability and Adv antages of Mimography,” Amertoan Annals of the
Deaf and Dumb, vol. xiv, pp. 157-182,

tSee American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. x, p. 116.

tSee Bulletin Philosophical Society of Washington, D. C., October 27, 1883; also American Annals of the Deaf and
Dumb, January, 1884.

44 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOLENOES.

with the language to be thoroughly qualified as teachers until after one or more years’ residence
in an institution for the deaf and dumb.

—F(0) The practice of the sign language hinders the acquisition of the English language.

“(d) It makes deaf-mutes associate together in adult life, and avoid the society of hearing
people,

. “(e) It thus causes the intermarriage of deaf-mutes and the propagation of their physical defect.
m “5. Written words can be associated directly with the ideas they express, without the inter-
| vention of signs, and written English can be taught to deaf children by usage so as to become
‘a q their vernacular.

_— “6, A language can only be made vernacular by constant use as a means of communication,
without translation.

“7, Deaf children who are familiar with the English language in either its written or spoken
forms can be taught to understand the utterances of their friends by watching the mouth.

} “8, The requisites to the art of speech-reading are:
Mh “(a) An eye trained to distinguish quickly those movements of the vocal organs that are
\\ } * | visible (independently of the meaning of what is uttered) ;
ly “(b) A knowledge of homophenes—that is, a knowledge of those words that present the
} ) Same appearance to the eye; and,
“(¢c) Sufficient familiarity with the English language to enable the speech-reader to judge by
ANA [ _Aontext which word of a homophenous group is the word intended by the speaker.”

7. From what has been said above it will be seen that we have in actual operation the elements
necessary to compel deaf-mutes to select as their partners in life persons who are familiar with the
i gesture language. This practically limits their selection to deaf-mutes and to hearing persons

; related to deaf-mutes. They do select such partners in marriage, and a certain proportion of their
hi children inherit their physical defect. We are on the way therefore towards the formation of a
deaf variety of the human race. Time alone is necessary to accomplish the result.

If we desired such a result what more could we do to hasten the end in view? We might
attempt to formulate some plan which should lead the deaf children of deaf-mutes to ma.ry one
another instead of marrying deaf-mutes who had not inherited their deafness; or to marry hearing
persons belonging to families in which deafness is hereditary. If, for instance, a number of the
ay large deatf-mute families of the United States—families in which we know deafness to be heredi-
tary—were to settle in a common place so as to form a community largely composed of deaf-mutes,
then the deaf children born in the colony would be thrown into association with one another and
would probably intermarry in adult life, or marry hearing persons belonging to the deaf-mute fain- |

edhe
|

make

Ame ee ES
aie = R

rey ilies. Though fewer in number than the original deaf settlers, they would probably be more prolific
i of deaf offspring ; and each succeeding generation of deaf-mutes would increase the probability of
the deaf-mute element being rendered permanent by heredity. Such a result would certainly ensue

if the numbers of the deaf and dumb in the colony were constantly kept up by the immigration

of congenital deaf-mutes from outside; and if a large proportion of the hearing children born in

the colony were to leave and mingle with the outside world. Under such circumstances we might

anticipate that a very few generations would suffice for the establishment of a permanent race of

deaf-mutes with a language and literature of its own.

Plans for the formation of a deaf-mute community have a number of times been discussed by the |

deaf-mutes themselves. The idea originated in the action of Congress in endowing the American i

Asylum for Deaf-mutes at Hartford with a tract of land. Mon. Laurent Clerc, in conversation

: with some of the earlier pupils of the American Asylum, remarked that it would be @ good

THR FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RAOE, 45

plan to sell a portion of the land for the benefit of the institution and retain the remainder as
head-quarters for the deaf and dumb, to which they could emigrate after being educated.* This
idea took root in the minds of the pupils of the Americau Asylum, and afterwards developed
into a number of independent and eccentric schemes for the formation of a deaf-mute community.
Some of the pupils before their graduation formed an agreement to emigrate to the West and
settle in a common place.t

Then a number of years afterwards a deaf-mute publicly urged the formation of a deaf-mute
commonwealth, Congress was to be petitioned to form a deaf-mute state or territory, &c. The
details, though quite impracticable, brought forward the fact that a number of schemes of some-
what similar character were in the minds of deaf-mutes in different parts of the country. One
deaf-mute publicly offered to contribute $5,000 towards such a scheme if others could be found to
join him. It was urged that the natural affection of the parents would lead to the distribution of
the land among their children, and that as the majority of their children could hear and speak the
land would soon pass out of the control of the deaf-mutes themselves. This was to be remedied in
various ways—as, for instance, by legislation—so as to secure descent in the deaf-mute line alone.
The American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb became the channel of communication between
the various thinkers.{ The scheme that received most approbation was the purchase of a tract of
land by a few of the wealthy deaf-mutes, who were to agree to sell out the land in small blocks
to other deaf-mutes. The whole scheme was afterwards discussed at a convention of the deaf:
mutes of New England, and was overthrown by the influence of the Rev. W. W. Turner, Mr. Lau-
rent Clerc, and other teachers, in conjunction with the most intelligent of the deaf-mutes them-
selves, Since then the subject has not been publicly discussed, to my knowledge; but such a
scheme is still favored by individual deaf-mutes, and may therefore be revived in organized shape
at any time.§

CONCLUSION.

T think all will agree that the evidence shows a tendency to the formation of a deaf variety of
the human race in America, What remedial measures can be taken to lessen or check this tend-
ency? We shall consider the subject under two heads: (1) repressive, (2) preventive measures.

(1.) Repressive measures.—The first thought that occurs in this connection is that the intermar-
riage of deaf-mutes might be forbidden by legislative enactment. So long, however, as deaf-mutes
of both sexes continue to associate together in adult life, legislative interference with marriage might
only promote immorality. But, without entirely prohibiting intermarriage, might not the mar.
riages of the deaf be so regulated as to reduce the probabilities of the production of deaf offspring
to a minimum? For instance, a law forbidding congenitally deaf persons from intermarrying
would go a long way towards checking the evil. Such a law might, however, become i ada
on account of the impossibility of proving that a person had been born deaf.

Legislation forbidding the intermarriage of persons belonging to families containing more
than one deaf-mute would be more practicable. This would cover the intermarriage of hearing
persons belonging to such families, and also the case of a consanguineous marriage in a deaf-mute
family.

In order to justify the passage of such an act, however, the results of intermarriages of this
kind should be more fully investigated than is possible at the present time on account of limited

“* See speech by Laurent Clere, “American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb,’ ” vol, x, p. 212.

tSee ‘American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb,” vol. x, p. 73.

t See vol. x, pp. 72-90; 136-160; 212-215.

§ Since this paper was read, a European philanthropist has commenced the colonization of a tract of land in
Manitoba by deaf-mutes. I am informed by a friend who resides in Winnipeg that about 24 deaf-mutes, with their
families, have already arrived from Europe and have settled upon the land. More are expected next year.

46 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENOKS,

data. Steps should be taken towards the collection of special statistics, and the institutions should

be urged to publish the materials in their possession. I wrote to the principals of all the institu-

tions in the country, requesting them to forward to me such of their published reports as contained

any of the required statistics, Although my request was honored by a response from a large num-
Ry ber of institutions, the information contained in the reports in reference to the subject of inquiry
was generally of the most meagre description.

Among repressive measures should perhaps be included the influence of friends to prevent
undesirable intermarriages. While such action might affect individual cases it could not greatly
influence the general result, For there is no subject on which a man will so little brook interfer-
ence as one of this kind where his affections are involved.

A due consideration of all the objections renders it doubtful whether legislative interference with the
$ marriage of the deaf would be advisuble.

(2.) Preventive measures.—The most promising method of lessening the evil appears to lie in
ti the adoption of preventive measures. In our search for such measures we should be guided by the
following principle: (1.) Determine the causes that promote intermarriages among the deaf and dumb ;
4 and (2) remove them.
ny The immediate cause is undoubtedly the preference that adult deaf-mutes exhibit for the com-
panionship of deaf-mutes rather than that of hearing persons. Among z the c: causes that contribute
to bring about this preference we may note: (1) segregation for the purposes of education, and
(2) the use, as a means of communication, of a language which is different from that of the people.
These, then, are two of the points that should be avoided in the adoption of preventive measures.
Nearly all the other causes I have investigated are ultimately referable to these.
] “try Segregation really lies at the root of the whole matter; for from this the other causes have

ann! eer

a

MY

eS

themselves been evolved by the operation of the natural law of adaptation to the environment.
“We commence our efforts on behalf of the deaf-mute by changing his social environment.
The tendency is then towards accommodation to the new conditions. In process of time the
adaptation becomes complete; and when, at last, we restore him to the world as an adult, he finds
that the social conditions to which he has become accustomed do not exist outside of his school life.

His efforts are ther directed to the restoration of these conditions, with the result of intermarriage
and a tendency to the formation of a deaf-mute community.

The grand central principle that should guide us, then, in our search for preventive measures
should be the retention of the normal environment during the period of ‘education. The natural tend-
ency towards adaptation would then co-operate with instruction to produce accommodation to
the permanent conditions of life.

The direction of change should therefore be towards the establishment of small schools, and
the extension ion of the day-school plan, The practicability of any great development of day schools
will depend upon the possibility of conducting very small schools of this kind economically to the
State; for the scattered condition of the deaf and dumb in the community preclndes the idea of
large day schools, excepting in the great centers of population. The principle referred tou above
indicates that such schools should be of the minimum size possible; for the school that would most
perfectly fulfil the condition required would contain only one deaf child. _ It also points to the
advisability of coeducation with hearing children—but this is not practicable te to ‘any, great extent,

“No instruction can be given through the ear, and complete coeducation would only therefore be
possible by a change in the methods of teaching hearing children. It is useless to expect that such
ya a a change would be made for the benefit of the deaf and dumb on account of their limited number.
Partial coeducation is, however, possible, for some studies are pursued in the common schools

in which information is gained through the eye. For instance, deaf-mutes could profitably enter

ears ag

LYN PORES NS DOSE IES ED

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 47

the same classes with hearing children for practice in writing, drawing, map-drawing, arithmetic
on the black-board, sewing, &c, For other subjects special methods of instruction would be nec-
essary, and these demand the employment of special teachers. They do not, however, necessitate
special schools or buildings, and a small room in a public school building would accommodate as
many deaf children as one teacher could successfully instruct. Considerations of economy render
advisable the appropriation of a room of this kind, as the appliances of a large school might thus
be obtained without special outlay,

The average per capita cost of the education of a deaf child in an American institution is $223.28
per annum.* Very small day schools could be maintained at no greater cost. The cost; at an
institution, however, includes board and industrial training. On the day-school plan the parents
would generally assume the expense of maintenance, and some special provision would have to be
made for industrial training. This need give no concern, for so many deaf-mutes are earning their
livelihood by trades which they were not taught in the institutions as to demonstrate the practi-
cability of apprenticing deaf-mutes in ordinary shops,

The indications are that in all places where three or four deaf children could be brought to
gether near their homes the cost would be no more to form them into a class in the nearest public
school building under a special teacher than to send them to an institution. On the basis of the
avurage per capita~cost at an institution the sum of $669.84 would be received for three, and
3893.12 for four pupils; and such sums would probably be sufficient to pay the salary of a special
teacher, as well as to cover incidental expenses,

If this is so the day-school system could be made to penetrate into the smaller centers of popu-
lation as well as into the large cities, in which case it would exert a considerable influence as a
remedial agent. The plan of forming small classes of deaf children in public school buildings
recommends itself as affording the closest approximation possible, on the large scale, to the normal
conditions of life. x

Segregation during education has not only favored the tendency towards the formation of a
race of deaf-mutes, but has led to the evolution of a special language adapted for the use of such a
race—the sign-language of the deaf and dumb.” This is especially true in America where the
sign-language is employed by a large majority of the teachers in instructing their pupils. In for-
eign countries the vast majority employ, for this purpose, the ordinary language of the people.
This will fully appear by reference to Table V in the Appendix.

The lack of articulate speech should also be noted as an indirect cause of segregation in adult
life, operating to separate deaf-mutes from hearing persons, Hence, instruction in articulation and
speech-reading should be given to every pupil.

This is done in Germany. Indeed, in 1882, more than 65 per cent. of all the deaf and dumb in
foreizn schools were being taught to speak and understand the speech of others, whereas in
America less than 9 per cent. were to be found in oral schools.t

According to more recent statistics compiled by the Clarke Institution} we find that in May,
1883, about 14 per cent. of the deaf and dumb in American tostitutions were using speech in the

! See Table: x in ‘the ‘Appendix.

tSee American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. xxviii, pp. 47-61; also, Table V, in the Appendix—from
which it will appear that of 7,155 American deaf-mutes, only 584, or less than 9 per cent., were to be found in oral
schools; whereas of 19,318 deaf-mutes in foreign schools, 12,662,or more than 66 per cent., were taught to speak in
purely oral schools.

$See Appendix to Sixteenth Annual Report of the Clarke Institution. See, also, Table Y in the Appendix.
Complete returns were not obtained, but the cases noted number 6,232, thus comprehending the vast majority of the
pupils under instruction in May, 1883, Of these 886, or 14 per cent., were under oral instruction; 1,105, or 18 per
cent., received occasional instruction in speech in sign institutions; and 4,241 received no instruction in articulation
whatever.

48 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

school-room as the language of communication with their teachers; 18 per cent. were taught to
speak as an accomplishment, and 68 per cent. received no instruction whatever in articulation.

Nearly one-third of the teachers of the deaf and dumb in America are themselves deaf,* and
this must be considered as another element favorable to the formation of a deaf race—to be
therefore avoided. pareconae Se Besta

The segreration of deaf-mutes, the use of the sign-language, and the employment of deaf
teachers produce an environment that is unfavorable to the cultivation of articulation and speech-
reading, and that sometimes causes the disuse of speech ly speaking pupils who are only deaf.

Having shown the tendency to the formation of a deaf variety of the human race in America,
and some of the means that should be taken to counteract it, I commend the whole subject to the
attention of scientific men.

*See American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb (January, 1883), vol. xxviii, pp. 56-57. Out of 481 teachers 154,
or 32 per cent., were deaf,

APPENDIX.

1, Tables A to M give an analysis of 3,726 cases of deaf-mutes from the American Asylum
and Illinois Institution. For this analysis I am indebted to Mr. Franck Z. Maguire, of Wash-
ington, D, C.; and I have personally verified his results. The relation of the tables to one another
will be understood from the following classification:

Classification of Tables A to K.

{ Whose deafness was stated to be congenital § erable Ey. have deafmute relatives (see

(see Table B). Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table F).
J Whose deafness was stated to be non-congen-§ arable Gy, have deaf-mute relatives (ae
tat (son Table 0); ( Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table H).

Total number of pupils of the
American Asylum and IIli-
nois Institution (see Table

The cause of whose deatness was not stated § Rerebie Ty have deaf-mnte relatives (see

\ (see Table D). Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table J).

Table A gives the summation of Tables B, C, and D.

Table B gives the summation of Tables E and F.

Table C gives the summation of Tables G and H.

Table D gives the summation of Tables I and J.

In Table K the non-congenitally deaf pupils are classified according to period of birth and
according to period when deafness occurred.

In Table L the non-congenitally deaf pupils of the American Asylum are classified according
to the period when hearing was lost, and according to the diseases that caused deafness.

In Table M the non-congenitally deaf pupils of the Illinois Institution are classified according
to the period when hearing was lost, and according to the diseases that caused deafness.

2. Tables N, O, P, Q relate to the Tenth Census of the United States (1880), and give the
results of an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns. (See communication
by the Rev. Fred. D, Wines upon the 1880 census of the deaf and dumb; proceedings of the 10th
convention of American instructors of the deaf and dumb, Jacksonville, Ill., August, 1882, pp.
122-12°, published with the 21st biennial report of the Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb.)

Table N gives an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes living June 1, 1880, showing the
number who became deaf each year since the year 1770.

Table O shows the number of these deaf-mutes who became deaf each year since 1873, sepa-
rating the congenital from the non-congenital cases.

Table P classifies the 22,472 cases by periods of five years and reduces the number who became
deaf in each quinquennial period to a percentage of the whole on a basis of 10,000 cases in all.

Table Q classifies the 22,472 cases by periods of five years and separates the congenital from
the non-congenital cases. s

3. Table R shows the number of deaf-mutes in the United States living June 1, 1880, arranged
according to race and sex and according to cause of deafness, The materials for this table have

99 A—BELL——7 49

50 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

been farnished in advance of the publication of the census returns by the courtesy of General
Seaton, General Superintendent of the Census. (See “Science,” vol. iii, p. 244; and “American
Annals of the Deaf and Dumb,” vol. xxix p, 160.) ,

4, Table S shows (a) the number of schools and institutions for the education of the deaf and
dumb in the United States, 1883; (b) the date of opening of each institution; (c) the number of
deaf children under instruction, 1883; and (d), the total number of pupils that have been received
into the institutions. These particulars have been obtained from the “American Annals of the
Deaf and Dumb,” vol. xxix, pp. 90-94. The table also shows (e) the number of deaf children
whose parents were deaf.inutes who have been received into the institutions. These particulars
have been received directly from the principals or superintendents of the institutions and schools in
answer to a circular-letter of inquiry. The total number of such pupils cannot be ascertained from
the table as some of the institutions have not yet made returns.

5. Table T gives an analysis of 215 cases of deaf-mutes whose parents were deaf.

6. In Table U the total population of the country, the congenitally deaf population, and the
deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf, are classified according to their period of birth, and the
number of persons born in each period has been reduced to a percentage of the whole.

7. Table V contains a tabular statement of the institutions of the world in 1882, showing the
methods of instruction employed. This Table is taken from the ‘“ American Annals of the Deaf
and Dumb,” for January, 1883, vol. xxviii, p. 61.

8. Table W gives a list of those pupils of our institutions for the deaf antl dumb who are stated
to have deaf parents. The information has been obtained directly from the principals and super-
intendents of the institutions in answer to a letter of inquiry.

9. Table X shows the per capita cost of the education of a deaf child i in an American institu-
tion. This'table was prepared by the principal of the Illinois Institution from materials published
in the American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, and from other materials privately collected and
published in the Twenty-first Biennial Report of the Illinois Institution (1882), pp. 16-17.

10. Table Y contains a tabular statement concerning the teaching of articulation in the insti-
tutions of the United States in May, 1883. The information was obtained by the principal of the
Clarke Institution, Northampton, Mass., directly from the principals of the other institutions in
reply to a circular of inquiry. See Appendix B, Sixteenth Annual Report of the Clarke Institu-
tion for Deaf:-Mutes, September 1, 1883.

11. Appendix Z contains an examination of the marriages of the pupils of the American Asy-
lum and Illinois Institution by the light of the theory of Probabilities, with the object of determin-
ing approximately the proportion of the congenitally deaf who marry congenital deaf-mutes. This
investigation has been kindly undertaken by Prof. Sinon Newcomb, to whom I am indebted for
the results obtained.

ral
an

nd

- of
red
the
ren
lars
sin
rom

the
the

r the

Deaf

rated
uper-

stitu-
ished
1 and

insti-
of the
ons in
istitu-

) ASy-
ermin-

This
ted for

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE, 5k

oi eae ‘BO BIUOZ 81) OF T10q sae ae nar, Teacune ‘
“a fect :
3 g | MOApTIYo Jvop Jo aoquind papsoooy Tees Fics ash staat aie Meee ee ae Attar ta eet | Ly
I i 7 . . Ge tet eee Fie, eee re .
= 5 UaApYO JRap Oavy oy papronnyg PS ET tt | Fe
4 roy 2 - Scien :
3 TOL Sop be Om wm om fF | o
| see tart =]
& ‘ga|BUL OY} 0} G.10q Cae eae ys ‘ aA PAD) eSB |
2. 4 UMPHUO Jeap Jo Loquma papsooay COIN Went et es Mate teen ae arn estat | bg
Re ¢ : : : : rset! ‘ }
AY 3 ‘WAApTTYD JVap oauyq 0} papsoday Lael ene bs itive fost eat SOR ee eg | co)
a 2 pais ; ieee teed eat ee
&5 A beet tose Soe :
S [BOT ia Mm CoRR AH Ft
3 iL : um Bae | | a
5 ‘strdnd ay) 0} m10q | eae $__t ices
g _s WapYo Jvap Jo soquinu pap to9ayy Lit tataapandices orhaee ater tte ad < Saker! | a
5 S re nee? Sat Saye
aa s ‘UOAP[LO JLop OAavy 0} papsooayy Rema ec bia ott cai Wty sped baeoat Peak eas ct re)
BS a sie e ne ‘ eae sare
‘WIL jan eo e+ bh BN Hw Pitren€ | Pi
2 Ryd oh ' 8 yyy 4
‘Bo[BULoZ OI[} 09 MLOq LTE a aE epee) a
: ‘ : oy ° . ‘ ‘
F uoap[Tyo yuop Jo daqunu paplooay RARE eb Noa A ks : : : ‘ | -
i ‘Uoup|Iqo Jvap IALT, 0} popsoday Pog th tm we ee Et bs >
Fy ees ss is Ct ewes cea NL Pvewanv ures bay!
mw | Pe eq ey ror
| ‘WOL wanes 2Seeaeece SAR: | g
| Heaetaige font a
a : Pe as tees ALS tet ‘ :
2 *SaT BUT 911} 0} W10q re sant °
: UdIP [Yo Jvep JO Loqund papLovoy UNE Sau ag gi ae a
DO} | aREaRC ae : tacitt
S o 4 ' ‘ yi wt Om *
8 a | UOAP[MpO JVAP DAVI, OF Papsoday ad any Ste oe is Ope in
eg | HO ita estab rect a
E | energy sta? i
i z aon} ok poh Oe) Ses SLB Ro 3
pr: E ONE ae a
F a i “LT EN TAGET Sea Sa SS . . ‘ ; :
af ; P| sprdnd oy} 0} Wi0q ea Rares ten hae: ' ‘ : :
ZB 3 UBIP[IO Jvap JO LOQIUNU popLoova yy at eta Li aie ‘ : ‘ ‘ =
= : Pisa ut LED fol SANs RED ARO Det eo iy
S 3 i Pies an eeu Maer La ee I. Sane A
= 3 UWIApTIYO JBOP OAV OF PEP.LOdIy exe alt Peet mh ia he ear ‘ | nN
S i) Ok a Re Roe i Beare
> . Yash Tet heme. tasers pe enka [ia m rae
: : : 4 ee x
s 6 iE ota ee aia
Ps 3 ‘gaTRULIY Ot} 0} WI0q, HR phen ae cco: Wea e a
s 2 WaAp[Lyo Juop JO doquinU popLoooy PRA tae eet : ot ”
= 4 : ; ne AOC ed
Ss ‘S ein: : ‘
a s i ; Be BS OR egy AB ea gil ‘ ro)
Ss 4 5 WaIp[ HO JLap vault, 0} pap1ovayy DIAN si Ae ike Bi bet | a
Sis 3 state Heart : ah
= sac eee ech ae AR el eg 2
| 3 hac 4 ' 4 ‘ ‘ nm
4 4 “so[BUL OY} 0} LLOQ bor, fee ae aha ie teen ate Cees
Uodp[ip Jvop JO Laquind papaovayy rN ee : ee ba
. . . . 8 $ ¢ . .
oS Est . . o oe 7 © ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
s 3 2 ‘MIPEYO FLOP GALT OF papsodayT LRN UNM he et : BF iste eae MCN att 8
< a Ss PEE eas Haines sree
c
a CJ ees 4 Q 8 oO H :
“THO : |
‘spidnd or} 0} w10q : ; : H : :
WAP) Jvop Jo soqunuw popsooay ean Sin Ce Oe ae eG et e
2 aie et
"4 “UdAP[IYO JVop BALL, OF papsodvay
a
‘WL |
° : 16
ber *‘SO[VULIT : ao 8 8 Ros S
2 : as vi
& E Canaan ;
Be “sole Se RE me hee
Eo x : a
25 a
$3 » ce Lie) i ed « Lyd 7+ pcs Coal Rel 2 =
A Mor, SER RAR RD ES
oe *‘POTRULIT : |
eI H
€ :
2 “ Lon] 7 = Url in id bso ba " — ay |
; > ~ oy ey |
E SoU a FARR AA ST | Rt
as
oO - n é- ~*~ gq J L = t t an
; 2 3 e § Ets * S
VoL 7" 88a BBR | 5
. . . . . . . ov
ra Mat Is OGTR A ea an Ste a
= peer WEAR bh Mes rice Sh
Qo & i
gs eegegesaeg2e2e2F 3
Es BREE EER Sak oe. -g
> i ' ! i= S
£* ¢ 3 a 3 ¢¢44d 3 ar} =
& ERE eo eS & 5

Re fee 52 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

} a
} 2 ‘sOl[UITAY, OY OF TLIOG pubneiat time Fase beleey a nar WS Vm ‘
S 4 r Fd UdIP[TGO Jeap jo Loquuu pops10ddy (PERDA ee a ed eit Rey ce eet ‘
’ { ; <s 4 ‘ ‘UOAPTITD JVOP OAVT OF POPsoI0yT fei hipeis {ice boecett meta tenile | ‘
{ = Bek ae See lat tee Bae Pre cre OLE eet
A lo HOG. tei a ee Mes ig
£ *‘saTBUU OY) OF T.10q caaeten ¢ Hae esha ‘ mies
‘ o. a UdIPTIGO Jvap Jo .aqiunu papsooayy : Pees:
f aS 2 . RBEL UN y Miah Mite aT Mera Lear &
i Ze | ‘MOIP[TYO JLIP OALY, OF paprooay WR etry BAO: Ane |
cz : : ‘ aoepT GER esey
‘ pes SONA i | | ca
2 : EIS DSRS ave OM italy ee ws
3 Mi 4 ‘stidnd ay) 07 M10q PMRER in oe sees eae es | | cl
“ 8 . | Morptiqo yeep yo caquind popzodeyy oh Nes ghee aie ea
‘ z Ned mae Se ale BATS EO a a Pa aeatt
i 3 & *UdIP[IYO JUAP GALT OF Poplovoy belt ata Soe soy | =
. ' “ot ply" peer sic | ron .
a i ; 4 wor, 7 8 4 eH A i cal | g
: y j ‘so[UUUAy O1[} OF 1.10q Ce ATT GAL eeT Tat CIR | o i
i Fy | WaAp|yyo Juap Jo doquind paptooay od H : : D ; ‘ ;
@ “MOIPTIYO JROp OAUY 0} popsoday LOiiet tea ec aeapear bin |e Can | =
| a SERA thas Gr SES, Ra RIE Ns RR mS va isak [nba Seaelloie Pah ety AB PURO toa LP
: | sy ananeoeesowoei:: nN My
| “WWIOT, tera ee py B
$s *so[VUL OTT} 0} TI0q Sam am fF ff 2%
i s UOIp[Iyo JVop Jo Laquinu pap10dey 4 eam Bei
¥ % =] i S ; \ i . ’ . Lata Uae Sy
4 oe { n . . '
a o >) i. | ‘ ‘ ‘ i
g | ‘UOIPT{]O Jvop OAVT] 0} Pops0I0yT{ H pangs ot | a
: reat : : ee eey :
s a ; ot =m mo om wm ft 5
2 ee | mop) {9 8 ieee ed (a :
S] A Rees: ns ttn Uae ules dbs aC an pe Sty ARS Rael ed oa eed
: = g S | ‘stidnd oq} 0} Wa0 aia ania toe enact a net
Ss | mcd I 1} 0} U10q ‘ tos a eeae UDG: istett men | e
is =I 4 | | WaIPTIYO Juop Jo daquinu poeps0d9ey Clad vient panes Mees endet pay (Se S ti
i" i) a Ce Roe — enim ; a or te
a) ) pete ; PS ei cS et el A 8
if ‘ | = | WIPO JVap DAVY 0} pop10dayy ‘ Hiei
j 1 be a | | NO o ce (eee Teoarat oa
4 E & 5 | | BLU A Oo Oo Se ! ’ Ui
ae 3 | Plat
Bi a - ———_—___-_—_— a +. ~
% y a b “SOTUIMAy OT} 0} T.I0G | 4 9m: © LNT nade bene ~
oe & UOIP[IqO Jvop Jo JvqQunu pep1090yy ae aieaal peta Cun |
~ & é : ‘t ee oe
a aaa S tin Hes {gle peers ios east fee 2
é Ss 4 | S| TIPO JVap OAT 0} pap10d9yy ead IMS eights .
i SRA o | eat Fa erent (a Bae
: = a ze of a }
ee OR ee re eos | &
~ tohig
=~ Lan . .
: | ; i Pe rabies eRe, Tpit
+ SoH *Sa[BUL OL} 0} TAL0G ae Se ie th Laie PR ack S
? Gace? UIIPTIGS Juop JO Laquina popslodo0y | EA Nirah
‘ | 3 g ae Pee Wan Guar et «aula Par coor o |
ie : 5 | “WOIPTIY JVop Iavy 0} pap10d0 yy Be
q 4 A Sas CEA ee ee ab fee
1B ie} | m= m© © me @ Hh tw a
3 Q | | ‘Tepog, = 8 ON ’ o
isl wn eS a Eanes : \
+ BS ‘sttdnd oy 0} w10q tHe GAA EAP an Piet gas at Me
: WIPO Jvsp Jo daywuMNA papsoday COL EPR (cits MRIS NR Seemat (teh) | =
a BOO BAe + a
A ‘MOIP[UD JVap OAVY 0 paps099yT HAs kee a
a | uni Sarealaa rs
g | ' | »aeeeonia
Sig j | ‘THIOL si Spe esl VEN iat a
°. : "Ab ©OrAeeE A
| bate SopVula sy AAS eee > ee | 8
q on ms - is ebeaehie ee
4 f Ee :
Ba won| i SHER ES | 8
e me or a oe Bi Ne ae
Ses \ n oO NAN toos + ©
ee WoL e8e88 & | +
, oat |
~~ oO ~
é < *‘so[BUIT = 8 5 3 a 3% | 2 |
z if ee oe oe cole
3 SoU a ® 8 w 3
ro] ASH i iS - Led tH = ie] o
*[870L NRA SBS 3
z Mi co a
Be : i a 8 a a Sed
ne biggie Moe ge Re aed
Be HB: st && BS & g & 8 i
BS PTs La
- | z 288888 s "|
; i § ee oe oe |
fi \
; o
}
a
}

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 53

‘sa[BULay OY) 0} WIOg FI Taga PRIS ANRC SE sar ae

Cag RR a aE rae ee
| § G | BAIPIYO JBep Jo Jequind paproony Chea bts arte : ts Lard
f 3 4 | *HIIP[JYO JBAP OAV] 0} Paps009yT Pabeasl so a Rees rat phd eras ae arin eae i | a t
i 6 eee ere ei ribeercmtrnenp ~— ‘ . : oe
E | ‘{eyOY, Sof tM Oe mm ts | g
a ‘go[BU ey} 0) Mog as UST BE VRE 8) 25 lt Fa Sa aa Saal el
ey gg | MMPI Juap Jo daquina paptooay COB Sat it cake Ma a 2 Bs WEA ae | a |
3 = q ‘MAIP|{]O JUap OAV 0} pop1oday { ' ' aE ts } | %
: 5 A Die Eee aye ‘TWO, 1 Hq 0 na wona#k#ena f ; ‘ | +
{ e | ‘spidnd oqyo;uroq Won eM tit esae: cetebeate PR rem teal ~
a ge eel CPEs TN YS es ROSE See A oak [ oy
- € ‘QOIP[IYO Juap OAV 0} paps0day Hc rl fanetl ie GLa ne: ese et Pe | De
as a Tait eee ta casein Ve
Zi THOT) ia Oe Memeane nee re i
2 ] SS MOTCOLATTONGON Ll le op ttn te wen ce emeneae 8 gene Ge we
| g | MMPI Juop Jo sequiud pepioday | ye ay ss ba : : | =
i a ‘WIIPTY JBap OAT 0} papsodaizyT Ps bas eS et ben Set aa | co
LS ipl ttc ca eee ent re ese ee eon rons AON eeES
| * mp Pk pa eR ee
3 | “BO[VUI Of} 0} T10q { ue ais 2 eo ay i ast a a
; : | UdIP[IYO Jvep Jo Joquuua papsosey H : trrniiat
3 eit a | i Gory [Teen ene AWE OR feed tee Ps | rcsaor co
By 3 a ‘MOIP[Iqo JLop Avy 0} papsoody Hanoi Vere |
é | Dep p oe DO eee Pak uae
: Xa ale a ae
dl ee eel | THOT, ie ne aul enaiega Fi
g ae ee Dero ae ec mee fo
pe Fs E ‘stdud om 03 w10q a ai tose A ee tN Sake Sk ee aed Cae
a = 3 DdIAP[TYO Jvap JO Jaquind papsoooy das Hel at etd a PEAT pla DT A a i
Be & ad : PUN eas Cte ete eT ReNCal ©
: ag s ‘UdIP[IYO JvIP GAVY 0} Paps09ayy ‘ {easier Rae Tea | al
r > | ay Ree Oem Bee eee toe
Ss 2 | Eb) Be i | 8
; mm 8 ae ——— aati to i
‘ Ss al “BO[BMIOZ Of} 0F T10q HITE UL Snir teers a
FE Ss g _ , WaIp[Iyo Jvop Jo soqainu papiooay dari NAD eS HOE Aigs
~ ‘= 2 ——— . hae a ’ . ’
aa 8 ¥ 4 Bee GD, TR ete od ‘ 2
Be & 4 5 “UIIP[TYO JVIP GAL] 0} PIPIOIOIY ee aire nat H : ise
h: = Oo 3 : H 4 : ‘ ‘
Reis Fa meta Pp }
7H Tani oe ee eed
os <q ‘ga Blu OY} 0} W10q Sot bb eo wm wom f : R
| UdIP[IGO Jap JO aquind paplovay felivigh tgey Ar§ ‘ :
8 = | g P Misses ta ARN to Tae : PNG RR) he ites ' : ; 4
a e eI UOLP[I]O JVIP OABT 0} papszoday eA ime ecdant Fee en |
< i= P| i mi : : : ‘ : ‘ &
| H : ~ ‘
* ‘TRIO, i ihe ec e s aNa saCa | %
| Bt Lope pip
‘stidnd oy} 03 w10q Be eae iste sy : : en =>
WIIP[Iqo Jvop JO Jequnu pep1ooeyy RRA San POU OMEN Cotto tend oe =
a EG) arises ii WUOREPIEHS Gialegereas asi ehnaan on cia 2
es *MOAP[IYO JVap AVY 0} Paploday ares se aaa orate a
‘a ? pas tea a vl Pe peat
| aie ae data wile,
| : :
wpm | 1 7“ RARBE SEB

band
R
nr Le ke ER

Not recorded to
have married.

| o°:o ol Baroy
‘THIOT, | Sy es hae gz & S
i ‘soreuog | | nw 8S 8&8 8 & 8 & 8 8 3
£ : Oe fe EBRD ned ENE ASE
ec ee ty eu Oa get Oh
£ aa 2 -_ _ — eA
So ‘1B)07, ape PI 3 8 ej 3 = % | § |
Fale RoeeSy fg " i SE pa eat a bevy Pet '. : hart
Se H i H : H t $ H ‘ H : : | saetod |
a |gespeze 232 3 |
3 2&€2222882883 3: |
Fo /8£88228223 8
| a oe RF RA A Se Se SR eS oe

ate ST

54 MEMUIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

i) | | | ‘sOTWAIAZ OY} 0} T.10q rae PRET SUSE vies EGY 5 yeh a | ‘
5} } | | g | MOAP[M[9 Juap JO JoquInM popsodoy Bie behets al SRO eer A ace ;
| bs | i | ‘MoApITYO FLOP OauY 0} pops0d0y | SR eats te tat ties St | i
1 | | | Natiad 2. eed sil : Pa Tigres : :
tt 5 al ‘WIOL i am ty : | ¢
; § *RO[WUT OL} 0} T.10q ATR ir ade Alia [meet tas :
| 2 e WaIp[[yo Jvap JO doquinu pepiosay rt Toe We : at hein i ;
SS —worpygo geop oavyoy popoooy | Gt EG i. t |
He AOA - INGE REA Vas SRE
1 : Lc, A eke et a eee Nae agro Ce,
4] = ‘spidnd 01/3 03 ti0q ee eee eT eee |e Begs ee | ;
, 5 , | WoIp[Yo Jvop yo doquind papioday ae het TOE ee Ce lie t | $
4 = | . . . ° . . . .
3 i $ ‘MIAP[IO JVAP GAVT] OF Papz0daqy aT Feces edals ia hed Ce Liao | | :
3 8 Son ath ROI at Oe SOP aes :
4 4 eg] bot lei fae
| ~ ‘sa[BUIEZ O1[} 0} TA9G mat Tee Tv TY Sars To ant FT pr ©
| , HaIPTYo Jeop Jo Joquint popsoooy pas fee Ree ee maa: |
3 “UOIPTIYO JVop 9ABY 0} pap.o000qy : : eR : : : t | ™
3 : ia
Lal *[ujoL, L H Slat aba Nah eo | %
| : het:
3 } *SO[VUL O42 0} W10q {cette SE ee treet: Both 8 ba!
s | UaIPTYo Jvop Jo doquuu paps10deyy H a emit ien ar Ca
Shae eee sans REE at tele
a | @ | . ' ’ . ' nN
& 14 ‘MAIP[TYO JVOp OAV 0} pap1ods0y : PALI YSU alee |
= ei? Antes ar Fa A te Zek
3 oe Oe MAGE | ec i Oe Pee ere
I s ‘ ; BENS Lies teeA
S | 3 | ‘sttdnd 0q3 0) W10q wT eR hte Br EOE oa =
5 3 | UdIP[o Jvop JO Laquinu papsooey BNR Bue hbetboiee Range buy bidee as =
ie) ; : es ea EEN wea"
. wee bea ats Sane er ties =
| = UIIP[TYO JVoP Oavt] 0} paps099y : aia Ses ie st |
. ao x ss aes
S 6 *TRqOT, Fi Ri eat it &
g a e fi 4 ’
—_ eB ‘sa[VUIOZ O1[} 07 110q Meee fs. Sa Panes nes ene te ©
Ss UaIpjlyo Jvop Jo Joquinu pops10d90y Oh en tay Ob IE
me & PA : :
2 & : + oo om ‘ ‘ : :
3) q FS “UOIP[IYO JRap VAVY 0} paplovoy Tara th Ck Waren n fk 3e! | b
= a N 4 H H {
3 2 a ee +i
S$ : iba
rs 4 fo) ial / 2a S&S . ’ Lond
2 G4 *‘Teqoy, ‘ 5 Mme | ny
S48 SPSS Sear Tear a
| | “SaTVUT OT} 0} W10q I Moeh sve Soret (A NC o
5 UWIAP[IYD Jvap Jo Jaquinu papso090y ; RL SRP Sd MN
l a Z ; RPO eatin ra Gaeta a
, = a ‘UIAP[YI Jvap OAuq 07 papsooay ' ek egy Lee ye et
3 a | paactiel NV Sap Se er
a “IMO, aed Gran ces a | &
i=) a AR err oe Tee" ry
< ‘stidud oy) 03 mioq ea ae, Bk ere Saleh A alle ~
i= UdIP[Iyo Jvap JO Loqund poprodv0y er (ie tetas eds eee coe Fanart =
£ ‘MOIP[TYO JVop OAT 0} pops099yy ean aes ae | bas
a ED Ahr Spc RAT “S : mk PIR Ae Fa
seats Ree |=
g, ‘go Bury i; FRESE: | g
33 : :
z E i, jt wt ON 8 2 @ pr)
5 8 i ig : Nn o J Land : &
2 Pparaur vice) oe i ae oe
Aa *1wI0Y, aeagsa : | g
et wpm! “ " RFSBR i? | 3
3 : 5
8 | ae Be en eorag 8 3 ° a : Rg
E “SOTUT : pod ta 8
oO r 8 ek eo > es. 2
‘18701, a 8 a s
i Ree Se Es ad a ats esa
ws | aay aes pert HA ae Pipe Spee Spy ;
mi 2eeseeee F :
= 2 :
BE eeezg226&§ g
2 Fs es =a mg
E tagagge2 8
a or i — | =)

}
j
}
j
|
|

55

“*- UMOCUyATQ
“*=> 6981-098T
“"7* 6CRI-0S8T
“--> 6BSI-OF8T
“""" 68SI-OE8T |
6zeI-0c8T |
“"7* GISI-OIST |
* 608T-008T
“> 66LT-OGLT |
- 68L1-O8LT
GLLI-OLLT
“*"" GOLT-OOLT |

“‘saTBUlaT

‘spidnd oy 07 w10q
WoAplyp Jvop Jo soqmnu paps090yy

‘SO]/ VUE 91} OF U0G
| WAIp[Lyo Jvop Jo zequud pap1090yy

| “SOMA, OY} OF W10q,
| WaAP[IGO Jvap Jo Aoquind popaodayy

*Ha[UUIOZ Ot[} OF TLI0q
UOApTTGO Jvop JO aoquina popz0deyy
*waUT pq} OF WIOq I
| WaAIp[Tyo Jvop Jo soquinu peplodody ——_!
‘spidnd on} 0} w104q
WaIpTIGO Jop Jo aoquind papsos0y
*saTVMOZ O49 0} T.10q
UdIP[IGo Jrop Jo doquinud popsovayy
| *SOTUUT OtT} 07 WIOg
Uae p|TYyO Jvep Jo Aoquna pep1000y
‘stidnd on} 0) w.10q
WaIpTIqo Jvep Jo Joquinu poparoveay

“HHIq
J0 polled

‘MAIP|IYO Jvap oavy 0} paps000yy |
‘UAIPTIYO JVOp OABY 07 popsooayy
‘MOIP[ITO Jvop OAUY 0} popsod0y
‘MOAPTIYO JVop OAvt, 07 pops0d90yy
‘MOIP|I[O JLop VARY 07 paps09eyy
‘MOAP[IO JVap GALT 0} popsoddy
‘MAIP[IYO Jvap oAavy 0} popsosayy |
‘UDIPTO Juop 9AUTT O} Papsz09ayy

‘MOIP[IYO JVop GAR] 0} popsop0xy

“SITRL “so[eula, “SOTR TY “sopeulay “SOLU BLSUN A

é
i

a “Sa,NUL-Jap 0} paTeyy -[p10, mene set so -[e]0} pawn

Jeap PolLivul Vavy 0} papi0sa1 3ON

=
o
=a
a=]
Aa
<
=
=)
es
i)
>|
=
fs
co)
ba
=
iS
_—
|
<
>
fa
<
<>)
a
<
&
io)
%;
ie)
—
>)
<
=
=
fo)
&
iS
ie)
=

“aaTu4vK

“WOTASY NVOIAKV

‘sprdnd foap hyjvzvuabuos-uoN—Q) ATAVI,

HH! 56 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

' \}
I i nay | es, ee "Pope, oy 0} T10q © FE ee as SG Ge ne | AEH
ot 3 g | Meapyyo Juop yo aoquina poproooy Deh, La bred tae A Oa es eS ‘
i c] 4 ‘UOAP[IYo JVop OAVY 0} pepr0d9y Lata SN a EL eas (mega a | :
is 3 s |——_______—__—_-- SSP nL en ST Se PO
i | 5 cm “18907, ‘om ‘ @ -w H ’ H | ”
i |g | | ‘#O]WEr eq 07 HOG ; TUS PERRY Tir RSE WT CON nd
ht | oy | g¢ | MAtpitgo Jvop Jo doquiud poprod9ay HP cethicey a PERM ut Pua Pe
, b | it UR ast : ‘ aaa TNS |
ph 88 | g | ‘UOAP[}GO JVOP GALT] 07 popsvovezy LP ti fad OM ab | =
» & BS | *1VI07, iit aa Suk Mad a a nh | bs
” a . ‘ ’
A | 2 ‘e1dnd 049 03 ua0q PUN Sit Ct crane 8G ea | 4
He yy! 3 | WIP Go Jvop JO Aaquina pepaodeyy Eee : pee let A a2 bs
: Bi, 2 | 6 ‘COAPT]YO JVAP BART OF popsodv9ey Lanier Wo fveet et oes (u/e (et, | Lig
5 < $ oie ee
te se a *wI0U, Cn ee ee) ‘ ‘ ' | bc} 7
‘so[WUa) 94} 0} W0g ent eae Apel tet Ae ee | | n
gy | SAIP[YO JRop Jo aaquind poprodreyy Sai erepetpeal
2 ‘MAIp[IYO JvOp GAVIL OF pap.z00eqT Hi Spectre Urea tacts | 9
A | a TERS ies eal ee =
. Wea ee | &
s ‘sOTVIU OT) 0} TOG eet iat SC ea ates ea eens ”
i 8 _ | UApTYyo Jeop jo soquinu popso0dey tes aa (ra beak
q Fs q ie \ PES ELS Si "i : : Aan! nn : ‘ : oO
q : ic MOAT) JUap avy 07 pap1000y tint |
Z bd a abt aires ON Soave Ah ees
=| s iu © - aaa Tae (ape
ie a ; 3 "TRIO, H oom Tee 7
A a ‘ ] : Lea Mh
3 BS i he bt
oy 4 5 SR Sate ET eat Kae Olea mr
a 5 | 5 “sttdnd oy} 07 w10q sada SERS ied Ei Oy Nea a at os
wa ia) | UdIPTIYD Jvop Jo Jequind poeps090yy Pe Nit a Mea a am ee | yes
= : eM ese tah ! We Fe Hee etal. nitlegcad any
, ! | g ee rr)
XK s ‘WoIp[IO Jvap OAvy 0} paps0d0yy eet Panetta
‘'— iv . . . .
ji { a : : rt
a 5 . ' o ‘ ’
: 2 3 wo i * 288 ei.
‘' 8 ; ’
4 S 3) “saTBULOJ OtT} OF U10q ana ee to CT ¥
% S = UAPTYO JVop Jo LaQ(MINU poIp.10deyy ‘ H ‘ Hy H :
a ; A Neh uP
Sad = n 3 } POD chee oem eh Sa ccaye CAON a
i 3S | zg ‘MOIP[ No Jvap vavq 0} popsooay, Pease ed ace ann
2 i S yoy ee Besiits
a =£ 6 Bi (=m ow ona: 3: %
i & § vino bod a ai oat a
fa = =| ut ES ee 7 Nasa eae Bonn ‘ :
wl 5 . : ‘
: S fe} *saTVUL OY} 07 U10q Fe Ae ae Fst eee Rees kit
2 GaIp[ yO Jvop Jo daquinu poep1090yy Brite Ries
4 S Fi ; — eet er
a 2s - ‘ hel MUR Al ree SN IB ice
2 3 Wop JVop VAVY 0} pops09dy bil a an
Bl = wee RR Fe
a a i eas
y 3 ‘sprdnd oy) 0} Mog CO ABER Aine mA DSL NCR gat — |
< Wadp[yo JBop Jo Laqund poapso9ay A a ceca RY SS Pt Ne = ‘
’ a 3 aa : Pi paeu ver Bat Fan pA eaee lene RIE -)
d Ss ‘HAIp[MD Yop BALL OF PIplOoIyy , H H :
f S Ley eee
4 “a © & se Hh OS ’ . 19
' ; ‘BOL a + 8 : : )
& ied spo) ~ ~ 15 8B Ss 7 | =
32 é
= 5 ;- Sseegagena a
} 8 FY ‘SoU IY : a = S g ® 8
Bo EE ate eaetNcay Urea = se Hh eS
5 g xo gReaean ov
ie ‘IeO7, SAA: SS @
a) |
: a ‘go BUA “8 8 8 8 Sx | EI
x
& -* 282329 820 +
1 ‘SOU atts : i © 8
s
oe
Ci ’ - | ed n i Seed
’ “wor PEP eo Te
as, Hap HOB CH ted Hane Note teehee =
a 2oe3oe$sde?ee#8e ef
#3 aiggiage’l :
: tad tg232228
a 2 & & 6 & 5
Saal - - - - ial nw

Re
af:

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 57

| *so[uuloy oq} 04 UtOq Ae ek ae He
% g | MOIPYo Juop Jo Loquina pepdoony | ft tt
L-] | F | “UdTP[ PO JROp OABY OF Pap.oo0y : H H : ; ;
z — — £ £ t .
E | A | ‘IO, es |
Fy | ; ; *BO[UIU O11) 0} MA0q Laan vice iy 2a 80)
eg PI | UAIPTTYO JuOpP Jo Joquind popaodoy LSTSn teat gerne see
3 B 3 | *MaxpTYo JUop OAU] OF popaooayy aR i ca ee a
: | | “10g, tom Nw ow
| ee ‘eqtdnd 043 0) u10q | aN SY Pigs et a
2 b UOIP[IGO JVap Jo daquind paplovay Ge asap hupeul ot 1 A8
a S ‘MOAP[TYD JVOp OAV OF Papsodayy Oy Sy a es ane
(ete) MAR ag Pease este lta oR: ATER.
¥ A . foal i ¢
| res Aiba [MOL ‘ eal ‘ a mo N
| | | *BO[UIAT Ol) OF UIOG Bick |
| g | MOApIYO Jor Jo doquinu popsoooy bh pe ae
; q | ‘MOIPIIYO JVap OAUY 0} Papcoooy i
£ rat rie ne |
TPIOL to ot |
| P - errno me we —— Sener ae
ye | 3 *BO[VUL O[} 0} WL0G Wa Butaihivet
rs | | z HOAp[IYO JUap JO daquind pepsod0ayy Taye et ean
& ala We oR
= | s q ‘MOIp [IYO Jvop AVY OF poplodday | daiigth pty soci tig eadeunt
a : Ea NSE ;
‘a sia
$ $s : | ‘ ‘ ; iota |
3 * PIG: Se ee |
8 Fo} Ss | ‘sttdnd oy} 0} w10q aibes ean Sane peer tae
4 UoIy: YO JOP JO LeQuInuU papsoda OUEST COInS Pa N ese alti
be Bs ¥ Be tot at aa
wa . 1 a eae ae x z Br gwosmonn amet - 4 |
8 a SRT a Ta Pane
& £ | ‘UOIPTH[O JBOpP OAVY 0} poploooyy a as fea |
s a SSeS Cin Satire St ea ne ett
S si ‘eyo, : ‘ ae
: gS B reese Liane Eanieh eed Jenene ibe soit
x Ba ‘saTBluay 09 07 .10q Rn: ie Cem cs
S 4 |, Wap Yo Jvop Jo daqunw peplovey FOUN EEO OR DELTA ak |
| 3 erotrtis a
> | | | a ‘UOAPTTYO JVop OAavy OF Popsodayy | ape a A a Oa | |
3 > | | i a Pr Wk Shee eh be ANT fy) ATOR eee : ae | f
S al Weft en 2
Ss 8 | won; i iii eran it
s < | *BOTVUL OTT} OF WIOG i 4 ' ' H H ‘ ‘ H ; :
3 UWaip[iyo Jvop Jo doquiuu papsoooyy init writ ath Mibu earn as :
S 3 g / j art rote eae niin $y aiieateeth Aah egy aNy ANG i
S = 3 MOIP[MPO JUAP DAVY OF POPLOd9yT oie ALS Me ey Saliba SetibaT Ca cts onthe TH | i
q Bee P| Biles : : ‘ : 4 ‘ : :
| | | SMO PN a Wie OT «a = TT | 1‘
J WOT | i ried ea i
6 " ; ; ; We ihe ot Baritone |
| ‘sttdnd ey} 07 u10q | deat ng A SNe Ta ea ie ae par
' a | UdAp[LYO JVop Jo doquinu paps0dayT UR earat AIST Renita ! = a
P| | z ‘UOAP[LYD JBop GALT OF Popsoda Hi abe Bal tala i i as a)
ra eg OAPLLYD JVOP GALT OF POPOV ' hye coast hal : |
a : : ite} |
*(vyoT, : : tyiets | Foti
pain tatar rs prea ah Ta RR er ey ee I ne: ©
at *sa[VMLo gy asad bore ‘ | os
ge " Paes PAA oss} {
3 E , | ‘ : xn mont OW HAN a
88 VOR hot | -
2o ss ge GT ep aa taal ag ; vet satrer| Lesley Da
28 | Wap et mnonarwtr oon | 2
oa ‘WIOL a ye ed
A levers
eee h | Persn Ue tes bg Nas ces cS em CIT aan Ea | ©
ne | *‘so[ BUA res Sha a bid
4 | ‘ ' : #21 PANEER =
= | reoTene tom a) scoot mM wan | & |
pS; | : : H
a | '
5 | iw ' 8 eh oR OE AON OM oc)
| “TBO, : : ba ary sd
: us erasers nM rel cnt rel eames Pe MPa A oA he Be ee te]
¥ Bhs Pome ot ietb ep lai cal
| 34 @pReeessaege2 seer 8 |
gE (oo RB Rom Bo ROR RS ee my
52 geeeeeee2432
| 5 ERE& & S&B BSB 5
=“ onl wo - A onl ec A onl ton | Sl we

99 A—BELL——8

i ! |
' | i 1
ii
|
ie 1]
ry
; 58 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.
t ! " } pes j *HOLVINOS OY) OF Ud I TLS y Raat fa Ra ee eae | :
ms! 4 | UOIPTIYO JVep Jo AequING popsoooy | SS PRN Scr a aad beet
m ioe: aRURS Octead Risen | apna
i i) | ‘MAAPTIYO Jap OAUT OF popsoveyy oh at ay ee BOGS Pa | :
-- abet oa sae rmennaietert eater sage |
f I <7) | “104, ’ co I . H | * |
< » | ' s re $ ’ =e:
# i; FE SER BOTW O49 OF TL0G OU es a ee as a NRL | ‘
’ : ea UOIP[IYO UEP Jo Aoquind pepsooayy eee PE Cot OPE ary len ite) |
- ( BE a ‘MOAPTIGO JuOp BABY OF popsooayy ' : neg ore ' ' | ‘
£8 rela ake % CET Phat as RY a a aa og
¥ 4 3 ‘180, ee A aR SS AS ad gy | tat
4 ' u RE PR SS ea a eh eo
¥ : ey ee ‘aidud 019 0) w10q Shr gota MOM | wd
le t 3 4 UAIPTIYO JVep Jo Joquinu peploxay Spek Sa at AAT aks Pee ee Oe Eee
it, re é "GOIPIITO JBOp OATH OF Ppops0900)7 ‘ ' ‘ ‘ : ' ' H | : |
: $i a | ‘1uqO4, gat Wiad ol ee a | Lae
at } | ie ik i toot oe:
‘he | ‘solUuay O43 OF HOG ber Lea OD oGe 1 | E | a
"fe g UoIp]}YyoO Juap Jo Aequanu pep109eyy [PALL Dat eta eA Te feet, Pas
i | 4 ‘MoapItqo Jeap AWG Oy popsoooy | S| | Ee a ae
: © | Kit : i a net
| 3 Ly fase Re fei ae a Be
} Ss |—___——— . SF Petey aM Ha ees at a)

A g | *SOTVUE OT]9 0} TIO OO ah A Neale (ed one Sag pete
af a z | UOIPTTYO Juep Jo doquind pop10seyy H Ae a! Ne es |
Ki ] | Or ieoaraevns 5 ye { i heaiinc spat

2) | 3 g ‘MOIP[TYO JVOP OAUY 0} pops090yT | H ahs Pe OR te NE | re
| a 7 t Pista: ‘ | eR ERY Ae EE
4 s tot om om mt ©
3 e | 3 THO egos
1 % | Ei | egtdnd 04 09 wa04 Fg St et NC ea >
+ a 3 | | Moap]yyo Juop Jo Loquind popsoooy | A aN aed Wiest oa Oa =
e Rg teres Pothee cat in: tect lea oie:

8 | 3 ‘MOIPTIYO JuOp OABT 07 popr090yy | t Gate eae | Sad a | es

a i aan ea” aoa Dee
j § A | | toy, | oe | | cI

if | ers ofr SEE san Se a SP iis a A ieee aE
q i 5 | ‘so[UTIOZ O47 0} 110g | TS BR Tin Sa RN Oe a {
{i Ss 5 | lg UoAPI}qo Jap Jo reqund peproo“oy | of fF fF of ot tt H
a 77] | sign ’ PHT NN aT TU OLY | a Hi
. 5 g q | 4 ‘UOIP[IYO JVOp OAT 0} pops0d99yT AS aay aes OE Ae Sid oc | |
4 3 2] | ; : a nn =|
i S =) | TO, ol fa Aww ‘ H | a

3 | | *SO[VUT OY} 07 H.I10q PG PRA Se Se AR ey alae °

= | USIP[YO Jvep Jo Joqumu paps0dsoy H at hel as Sa
re 3 4 | g era tage EG Sa Miser tome eL lc t =

rl 3 Ss | ‘MOIPTIYO JBOp OAVT OF pop109ayT H He are ‘
3 ~~ H | A atone ~- — ~ : ' = |
A | a co |
Al 3 | BLUR A H H
SS | —————
& | | ‘sqyjdnd 049 03 a10q lee iain sa tee =
Nl | weap[Tyo yeep Jo Jequinu poprzooayy ep eet tet uk sent Nea a =
. lat Sree Wobicea gins eal nega ase a
fa) S *UOIP[IYO JLOp GAUT 0} Pop1O0y : Hemet tate
: Ler) cl ag ee eee
a ae i |
| m $4 wwmog) ~ ~ 9 ° BBA" | 3
3 e
b i sd teats
cs '
& | " Ae ah = So's i S Za
ga | a as ace,
F oe aoe (tot NERO ? Pg Mae
Ps wopy!) : “9 FA RSR | s
a F De Sf. | .
S TeIOT, | MS Be 3 a % | 8
‘ Gee age a ee
3 $s a .
4 |8a8e¢geeeF g
i | £8288
| A nl foal Sal inl Lan! - =)
ie

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF HUMAN

*‘#O[UUYS OY} OF TLE
| i | MOAPITYO Juep Jo soquind pepsoooy |

HOUPTYO JUep OAUY 0} popsoooyy

TOL

WO[UUL Of} OF Og |
_Maapyyo juop Jo doquinu paptoooy
MOAPTIIO Juop OAVY 04 paproony

| i

MOL

aidnd om 0) wi0q
WAPTYO Jvop Jo Aoqunu popsopey |

4/14 m%

UOAP[TYO Jap VAULT OF peplodoayT

Not recorded to have married deaf-
mutes.

*(Uy0L,

13 | 41

| ‘#OTUMAZ OY} OF ILLOG
UOIP[YO yvep Jo aoqunu popsv9axT

| *MOAPTIYO JUOp OAUTT OF popso9ayT

‘HOT, |
‘HOVE OT) 04 tLL0
WOP[YO Juep Jo doquinu pepsoovo0y

‘UOAPTIYO JVop OAL 0} popr090y

TOD |

Married to deaf-mutes.

‘epidnd oy} 0} w10q
UOIP[TGo Juop Jo doquinu popso0d90y

‘MOApT}[O JVAp OAUT, OF popsodayy

‘1wIOT, |

‘gal uUay Ot[} 0} T.10q
| Moup[Tqo Juap Jo soquinu poeps090yT

‘MOAPTIYO JUap OART OF Pop1oday.

‘1ByO4, |
‘SO[VUT OTT} 0} T10q
UaIp[IGo Jwop Jo Aoquinu peps0o9y |

‘THOAPTIYO JVOP OAT, OF POpIODOY,

Total married.

“TRIOL |

| ‘spidnd oy} 0) w10q |
| Morppiyo Juep Jo doquna pops000yy

‘MOIP[H[O JVop OAVIT 0} POpsoooy

"WIT, |

147

*SO[VMIOT |

S
5
;
3
;
&
‘
iy
a
4
bi
a3
£
:
:
:
ica)
|
&
|
5

‘sa[U]L |

354 207 |

‘wry, |

“BOTBMIAT |

son |

15

| 1770-1779 ....|..----|------|-

*1eq0 7, |

1780-1789 ....|
| 1790-1799 .-..|

1810-1819 ....|
| 1820-1829 ...

1830-1839 . .

| ee
| 1800-1809 ....

60 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENCES,

bh POLMUTA, OG) OF HLLOK oe wre Yee? kt | ;
it % 4 HOLPTYO JUap JO doquA popsoooyy eet Pe ek ea ee t
) : a) a “UHOIPLIO JuOP OAUTL OF POpsooay ; a { H i H | eo)
d v Aon ‘Siem ana incumeneat Vac (en | .
' ’ al Wo, ea be eee ny oes | oll
il “WALHEL OTL) OF Hq TS Ca ee a eer es ae | rar
‘ & 4 é TAP [YO JUOP JO doQuINd popsoo90yy eS a nae a) Sa H
. fs a THOAPLPO JUOp Gat OF papazooayy ' wow eee i ' | '
7 | = ‘ , +
‘e 8 TUN A i ee ee | “
| “ ey :
“ ’ | z “apd aq) oy muon H int H H ' ‘ H | H |
* wi | § UPTO PROP JO LeqQeand popsovoyy A Siding AG lt Lie ll AS :
i . 2 | é 3 “HOAPTPGO JUOP OAM OF POpsooay aR eal aoe ‘ ' ort |
; = | § = “Sign Dea Seer aad Van ane .
ig = Aw {HIOT, dh etal espe Teel Gey | "
"4 “" 8 ‘wa(UUTO, OL) OF LIOR ERY a ia Fs ee) as Rat | -
a s, UMP[IqO Juep Jo daqamud popwoooyy eat TS ad Roem ks
§ 4 *HOLP[TG9 JUOP OAV OF POpLOday ' tt ' ' hat | be
t s | s 7 im a ae a a ae
1 3S | MOL Toot et ;
b < FE ‘sO[UUL OT) OF TLLOG LS SR (eat er (I a | ‘a
od Ps | ; TOIpTyYyO JOP JO LoquiNnM pPopAzovoeyy : Yh ak Sa RA Se
‘¢} I o t rida 48) keel ot :
i = 3 4 *HOIPLYO JUOP OAUT, OF Popsooayy H He GS amen ed A | =
ap Fy i] A ay ‘eae rr)
HT = 1” 7. ‘ ‘ ‘
bf = “ = DLIUN ' at ad | ”
i: : # | § ; oo
\ o | 3 ‘aqydnd oy 07 W10q Bd SS ee Sa Set eg sed arts
: 2 4 HAP yo Joap Jo doquind popavooyy Gale Pee bi OR, evbe Mae a
Di 3 a | ‘ . ui " 1 ____
ee D Z THAIPENLO Uap OAUT, OF POpPsooayy ' sian ' ' ‘ H i Ms
5 DINLO FuOL Tod peop
i & P= { ful fomakr fps ace
4 » y | Oo mst oro
iu 3 6 won| $ 7 ARG ts | s |
> — ' ' ‘ |
\ s eH i : 7 |
8 > 2 *BO[BUTOZ Aq) O74 TA0g OTR GA” an PS eos ate ee bc thall |
H s ~ WaIpL yO Juop Jo JoqMINU poaplo9ayy H H ‘ ae Al ecg EDK:
i biome g abst a gat ae te |
f = 4 4 *UOIpT] GT JVOp OAVY OF PIps0d0ezT : ! ie ' ' : : ' | roel
‘ S » 3 if ea |e See ST FLAS |
a = 5 a ar ara a eg S
: s Z *(UIOT, ree is these | <2 |
* Ss oR | - a ory aC Deer a at
be | } *saTUUE aT) 07 WIOq SHE eB a a tba oy as
q 5 | WOAPTTYO Juop Jo doquinu papsoseyy f vA aks MS aa
4 3 Z Fa MA an Cae en
: H s z 3 “UOAP|TYO JVAP OAUT, OF POpPAOaYT H WPA feet Sms waked Cad at | i
i 2 i=) a : ‘ t ‘ : ' :
= a | bt
Ps S jeqoL, : tos ' | “
; | Ss | ‘sqrdud or} 03 m104q Wael Nga as bt aa o
UOIpP[o Juep Jo doquinu papasoooy H PN ee ue | eet SA 5 ~
] s PHO JUOE Hl pap1o90y peat ed eet a: 5
s | 3 Teg Tie it |
. | ’ Lal - ‘ ' ' ‘ '
i = | g *UOIP[ITO Jvap OAV, OF pops09aqy H PE Oe Leh Oar i
# ~ 3 | H ieee Cet a
t 8 | a ; ——
tg ~~ : * Bo we oe —
Eh = MOB eR | B
| ee 2 : : :
q S
rd 5 S.; ‘souMeg ER Viigo, iia = |
Ss gt H : |
| FE oH ~"gage”eilg
j ft ica} | o& | Te '
) | z g f
« | = : ~ we & we |
_ fe | ga *(eq0T, ‘ SR AB SF : | g
<4 (m8 ® © mR Mm 3 | g
<I | te *‘sO[UMLAT ' Le i HA! H
| | $ ‘ : |
| 2 i++ 86 eo eB ww
= ‘SOUT ' Fait ahy ely we 3 |
| FA ‘3 aes ne :
; . “18707, ae esa” | =
4 TRC es earl saape tae ee et it}
d 5 oe ta Ae) es ON eet ae ee |
q ua epgesgee2eeF 32
: 32 }e8e2ee82 3:
a g4 (24232224
uf & & & Se & 5
Saal -_ Sol -“ = - et

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE, 61

: ‘woTMIUAZ ON) OF LOG Tr iat rey eee “he Maes Tat ala a |
o | MOIP IYO Jwop Jo JoQuind popsoodoyy | 5 A ee EN A Aca eT cee Ae
‘ HOIPT[GO JuOP OAUY OF papsooady get aS a, ete | '
ha ela Fe A ioe ee are eS eS 2 a | ©
| | *HOTUUT ONY} OF ULE { i: ; ' t $ Z f }
g 4 HOUpTYo JOP JO soquind popsoooy | oA ae MED ech jeu eo eae et |
’ i : ; | ‘GOAL Jap oauq oF papaooay ae ' ' |
8 | ‘oy, Re ars aed ae Sy aa a | a
q ‘atidnd oq) 07 W104 RE SS Sy Se a a ay es a se | Fy Jt
1 HOIPTYO JuoOp Jo doquind popsoooy Pack veh pwaer sip etka Je et vere ie ‘
a | MHOLPIIYO JuOp OAUY OF papsooayy ES SS Rs as es A a a ca | :
S 3 Ben eo at } ;
” r my) j jem eeaen ttt ips
‘HOLM, OL) OF ILLOq : Bick bh ae aon see ' ”
| WOUP[I[O Juop Jo doquinu popso090y aes CaN eM ‘ |
| i UOAPTIO JVOP GAY OF Popsoooy BURR A CL nL eek at dale ey | *
| m cn AM Sl OO) Biche dita tee Sit Be San | a
: | g ‘POTVUL Of OF HOG PU ES am aie att Ne Sane Pans Ahi Sune be
$ 1 UOAAIP[IGO JVOp Jo AaqtuNd popszodeyy ea Ae Son Ya ae Ss eee
5 a re ae Oe ae ae a a a a ee
§ 4 WAPTO Jvop OAuT OF popsoo0yy ee A sil Dar wali ales en
‘2 H 4 LEAs) RRA SO 2 Soke Se EL SE
3 ms} | | ("Seaman te
4 i be
4 3 3 ‘etdnd oy 0} t10q POE RUNS Dacipt NIG 9 Nissin wal Re Sd i eco a)
s | WOIpPTYO Juop Jo Aoquind papsoooy Ames) tases a | Oe ae SARS Dace ‘tit ol
3 3 i LIS ET ities aa Sa" SS | om |
aS S UOAP[H[O Jp OAUI[ OF pap«OdaT Bell ais Len iE ;

P| POE Cee Sat |
sy wil [ple een eer le
S pb Fo Mca : |
3 Is ‘woTUIUOy OF LOG SAG I PRET tats a la gi BT a * |
x, 4 Wap [YO Jvop Jo Aoqumnu paplovoy Ses RIE Cnc } Piatt PONS te PE
= : Poa ee
ate clea oe Oe aera «|
Ye, 4 | § GOAPTIYO JVap OAV 07 papsooayy PNIeen Daly H bt |
§ oS | ; a om co @ fy
cs ; Pn a 2 8 : bo
» § 5 ane :
~ | ‘ ' ‘ ‘
= < | ‘soTVUL OTT) 07 10g : re : ”
= | UaIpTYyo ep Jo doquinu pepsosoyy H PRE H H
= 3 | g ‘MOAp[Ta JVop OAvY 0} paptodeyy | or ticeduett | hid
2 a | a saa See Waal Ui sit EEA Uae
~~ ee ee ee o
| | ‘{WIOL, i ‘ = = = = om ‘ ‘ eo
oa | ‘stdnd 049 07 W10q a aa : Aint Hs =
a | | UAP[IGo Jvop JO Jaqainu poepslooay Ry WA a ' ‘ ' H : ' ba
i~=) | at : nan ‘ ‘ : ‘ 1”
< s THOAPILYO Jp OAT, OF paps109ayT ‘

Pa Bienes : : '
7 a ear a a | 2
£ < ‘ga[BUOT ;t Pre RRR RAR : | =
| ee : : :
SE aioe {
Ea are Rta Oe tk A ge pd une l ,
i . . .
° _ - =
34 me ee Oe BR
Ba *vq0L, + } i
‘ *so[VUIT oe Re ee ee | z
| 3 ne ‘ : ye :
E apn) ee eR a
FI eee . : ‘
od mop “ ""SBSPRERES : | 3
| x Ras aa ee eh ee ae |
‘ 2 2e 2 oO
34 |gegssgge2aee¢e2e5F |
| 2 -deddgdeagadaai €
f |ESERESERSERS 8

62 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

baer ‘ ; “eoruuty 0} 0} W10q (SER ; Fath ¥ : | ‘
| | ¥ g | Teupyyo J¥ap Jo Joquiuu peproooy | ss :
| : 4 *UOIP[IYS JVOp OAVY 0} Papsodo0y ‘faecer eet ‘ | : °
J Aske 2 4 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ . ‘ . %
| |e |* Mol ce tes cree
} § ‘mare ly. “SOTBUT OY} 0} UI0G Page RSET SRR Spd Sd BGT LN :
2a 3 | ZOIPITTO Jeop Jo doquund papicooy CBr eR Es Wace es AoE Ye | ‘
Ss 3 | ‘MOIPTIGO JVop OAVY OF Pops0d0zy] fecal ee foetal aed wat ea | H ‘.
5A re : a oa eres cel naa aa eae Stn _
ae | Todds ee tak: eer bo hoe
¢ ‘sitdud oy) 07 a410q ESAT SUN G1 fu et holt a tN i
| 8 _; | T&PINGO Jeep Jo Isquind peps00ay ete ie WAL beat a | :
| | 3 € ‘MOIP[[Yo Jvap GAvY 0} pops10d90xy | ‘ ‘ : : eat pitt | t
| bik BH ’ Sete TaN SIE .
| | G *]B,0, : 4 ei ‘ : ‘ | a Py
| i % ~*gaTwutey 04} 0) T10q ; He titegve eens taste ee | cian
| | a UoIp[Iyo Jvep Jo A9QuINU pop1o0day teaeok Git ener bey ates
| j 3 ‘UOIP[IGO JUOP DAVI] 0} Pops099yT RDA Pest tee Mal on aioe od it | C)
; j =] ——— —— - . LV i oe LU S| eae - <
| | o Ce ee : rc)
| Tong hes ; ;
a | 8 | *sa[BI Ot]} 0} W10q He ace Nee PR a AMA RST ”
| | z | WaIp[Tyo Jvop Jo Joquinu pep1orvoy eal Nom iehlect a Pa |
3 3 \4 -
| é c ‘UOIP[IYO Juap OAVT, 0} popsooay
s eee
8 ae |
3 8 3 1F30.L ‘
2S i) E a it ee eee :
a) g S ‘spidnd 04} 03 w10q | o
3 3 WaIpTIqo Jvop Jo Jeqmuna poepsooay eae
oe Tae: 3 ase
3. = *UOIP[I[O JVOpP GAVY 0} popsgIayT |
H a |
Z yy
s iS) ‘TeIOT, : | &
S & we U
s B | ‘sayetloy 03 WI0q bad
Ss & | _ | B@ApTYo Jvep Jo soquna paprooay
S 7) H 8 ee ee eee See ee © See athe ak % e
2 ka 3 ‘HOIP[IO JVP BABY, 0} pap.10deyT | ce |
2 : ; |
= fom r |
= S | | ‘180, | ay .
& ; |
> Q | “So[BUI 04} 0} T10q coal
3 | | WeapTIqo jvop Jo Joquinu pops09eyy
Ss i P | eater
| = a
=> | 3 g HA" P[IGo Jvap Vavy 0} pepso9ay | =
= Ps
SJ ©
8 ‘TROL ‘ a al
S — —— ; |
§ *sjtdnd o17} 03 u10q | H ae tome | : =
d UdIp[IyoO Jvsp JO Jaqunu pep10dey H eee eee | : cg
| 4 Mie oa ma eee | . ® bcd ec ‘ . : ’ ~~
fi z ‘USIP[LYO JVop ABT 0} Poploday tot tas :
a | 10, a NDA 8 : | 5 |
a SONAL SE Nel ens 7 es SU ; |
ae Neorg) AO emer | :
i \
E g Peet A ee ah gre an ~ ee 2
ge 1 : &
zo aE St aeee | :
ee fr ; |
33 Neate eae ee oe
; vine | TO RRR | €:|
| H
8 te aod OR bs M5 : “ ;
3 *80[U FL H sR asagar | g
E Sirs
o | os Oeil tabasco te Ok
% Pe ae a a eh
5 a 2 @enkea Pa
FE eheggect g
e shaaaaeg ©

63

THE SORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE,

ZS ee ee ee Gn ae — fee Baa ee aes Pera pee as
| nee bs ea | o NT meee | a {PRS ee rere Here |
T | IT | Sa /6 | @ \1 0€ tA 6 So tr | (i) 1% 6¢ OF oF 98 s9 =| «08 cet Te30L
| | ye Ea ED? Neceaeiis, PUce Aes he iad iy Har Da [SeSieest Sees ee eee cee aes EEE eas Mercia: Meee Mees Bees eee Sieewet {
i} | | | |
5S. Gis set Shon: festass[astese|eneeee soceee|eceeee|eecese|saeses aeaeas caceee| states cewaeslaneeeslececeslcececs|eaeens ananas cecane/ states] seeees seeees + MOU, |
j
|
led hd ad Cel bite peomcocre |cerstefeoseectoeer=- Jocrersleccceelccecne| omens |oeewnei corns /conncelccccesioorcne i) 9 faa g 19 $I" "* 698I-098T |
{ |
wren) & oo oat | T Wes ee a | | T I Pi Sh a Se ess T 9 | 11 bag iia ST 4 § oe = (*""* 6S8T-OS8T
| | j
ig Moe £ racer a | ¥ Seeae) Carre Ht ES Tea 9 | 8 st | 0 | &t | &T 9% "7" GFST-OFRT |
rest facie) anges Noha Ceca eam gs Saeoes be eet T 8 pieecpeet peers [hy ees res 8 1¢ 9 It ras L 61 ~** 6€8T-0E8T
| | |
Ee ta op ere | & ¢ I T St apre = ee. + 9 ¢ t 8 | 2 L las “""" 668T-028T
sors be a eects aerate teed) keep ean : saan: (Sear eee a are eetrat eas 4 ¢ ae T T i€ € 9 “""" 6ISI-OI8T
| | | |
|
Pater br vA poRe poceaspromtss|s—sere a Seems Saree) by < Se aoe road © | ¢ ra ¢ L P 18 as ~*~ 608T-008T
| | | |
Sigs arty GSOe Te erie A re ee SR etre i Ste, Gone pager Sarin isaree | emaaeas Aili Sais ae a2S seo es £ , Se ies 1 i$ ie 3 id “""* 66LT-06L1
| 6821-0821 |
| 6LLI-OLLL
| (Sais ecaeares emcee! Oars 69LT-09LT |
! 5 | : : | | =
| i ed =] | =] 3 io | sl ol 3 oI et =] I md i]
Sisiel 2 SiEi s8/2 $s) 2) $) 812) §1 812 $18), F) 181/28! §/s Fl ei ti Pil el] el =
oi el 5 a F BF | & | = te eg ts e & B FF e| & a : 3 :
Se) 6 | om! & | ge = Se o| o=| & ge| & Sa) & oa] & oe Se ; . |
= - =| he~a ; = ee | oz > |
Be) S| Be $ BE Ss B21 6 38 = aH) 3 [se] ¢ eel oS. HES }
Se =) -2\5 sis $3) 5 oni fe fen | = S21 5 2B) & #53 | &
oe) | | cei 34 SS < +5 4 ,cot) 4 cel & ao| 4 So} & oe! 4
ES ¢s stio SS) 0 ES\o +3 o | <¢ ° =e e +2 S ae e |
o7 | aed es a e7 7] « aed om ad = Sa Ze = |
woo! S| Sols So > mo = }eo] 1 Soto Ot le So > 2o = |
Sm 8 | a= 2 2h o= § a=! 8 =! & Se) 3 g> 2 2) 5 1
Bel & | Sel > Sa = Ba! = | Eo} = | Sa.) h Ba| ™ pa; ™ fa) > |
22) 0 | se|¢ Eis 22| 2 eet St ESie¢ BS lo ssi & 32; & |
seizi B82 FRE iBRE a5 & gm) E g*| & FR) E ee 5 je
“oe S| o| = °o| = ro ro) = e| = "ol = ° = mies = | Wgaiq,
Ei | El ¢ Si 2 | Eid | Ele = ee aes =y ee Es El ¢ | jopoleg |
= 8 | E| F BS) | BF | | =| F =| 5 | &| & =| 2 =| 2 | |
z € 3 } so} | S S | od pee 3 é | |
HS RS eB} | 5 id | § pes | 8 | g iS |
| | | |
| ‘s9yeqe “Soje yl ‘Teor, | ‘setearog | “SOL *[ByOT, “so]BUla,y | “SOIVL “TeqOL, |
Hy t | I | |
eee = Ge Ea ea ae tes DOE aoe ae zee peas pops Bie |
} | { |
j “soqznur | E | ; | *perivar oavy : sass
i SOPNMI-JVOP 0} POLIT] | 1830, | 0004 JON [e303 puviy
| yeep pariieur avy 0} pepsover JON | OF Popz00es 90K |
Se or oo ese ne | |
{ “qaIaavn |

‘WOTASY NVOIWPANV

“UaIp)LYyo UDYZ 4940 s2aIQDI24 a4NnUL-foap savy 07 papsoz—4 spidnd {oop hyvpiucsu0s-uoNn—D ATAVD

aa
at 64 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

gh | sopumoy oNFORUIOG | tt
ye 4 | g | WIPO Juop Jo doquina poproooy | _ IMRT Ne vaulted Peay zeae ose AY ‘
‘ » | 3 | 4 <OIP[IYO JVOp OABY OF POp1090y : : : | ‘
i ’ | ‘ 2S ; ; 5 7 ' . f ‘ :
: Bae Sk. ive Se Sta
d | a | *go[UUL OY 07 110g Rescue Man Werte rae CMT Op | ;
«) | 2 | g HADI Jvop Jo soquunu papsovoy ULE RATS SOARS eon a hare
A . | £8 ls ‘U9IP[IGO Jp GALT] 0} pops090y Harte acon laste teeta | } |
tH | £aia eae cafes IRB te ie esa sec ators |
| l= | 19 MR UL en Ke Tate th
3 ae o | +4 ‘stidnd oq} 09 d10q_ Marte Vaile atee Wiebke ee :
- w 3 | 8 , | WdIpPTIqo Jvop Jo seqmunu papsovoy | Mer eae a paee Teas Sit oes Tr Same ey | 4
| ° = ry ry : : : . .
ya | ' £ “MIIP[IG9 JVaP GAB 0} PAp1OIEz | CRT TES ta Lerten ti atcerene yah | :
A= 8 ; AOA wat leat lore seest et gt cha eet: ’
Hid = eg e ins ha SE ME eT eT e
2 | eet (3629 SB ligt eka
© | "gal UUley O43 0} HOG pose woe Poe |
| g _Maapliyo Jvop Jo aoquinu pops0o0yy bres} yt | | :
ij § 4 “UOAP[IYO Jvap GAY 0} popLOd0y | tal { | a | sig
— | My “ily on H o |
S a ‘MOT, |
2 : |
Ss | ‘é etaitg cour anaes RT ee r |
i 2 | 3 *sO[BUL OT} 0} W10q | ! n :
‘ \ s | | $ UoIp[Iyo Jvap JO dequina papsodey |
= eg : ~ |
s = | "ax ‘ a
; | § | a] UOAP[IYO Jap OABY 0} paps0d2y
9 a : eS
~~ £ | | (ee
S 4 Z *[ev07, |
$ | E Lhcadyaclbomnecon |
Ss g S ‘stidnd 043 03 ad10q =
3 3 UOIP[IYO Jap JO Jequinu paps000yy =
= q ; | a
P $ ‘UOAp[{o JBap OABT 0} paploddy
: ae A Ale Nia ARR EU ET SCS |
2 & “PHO, | a |
> & |
~S b *SO[BULAZ OY} 07 TLIOG a Ae |
a uaAp[Iyo Jvop Jo dequina pop100eyy
j 8 2% | ‘3 “ua. aay | et
‘ Daa | g DIP Jap DAVY 07 popsi0day
H 2 8 = S
rm *[WI0L,
a Ss oA
£ tS “SOV OTT} 0} LIOG a
| gs ; Ualp]Lyo Jvop Jo Aequinu pops0ooyy
a S ory
ce S 3 g an
F} & = a *daap[tyo JVap OAvY 07 papsov0y 3
{ tS a |
4 & aed
$ S, ‘VOI,
ay Ss =.
q 3 “spidnd oy} 03 W10q =
¥ 3 UaIp[Tyo JWap JO soquinu pepsoday od \
= 8 UOAP[LYO JVOP OAVY 04 Pepiodady
~
‘=
; 8 ; x
} S M TOL] m
By ~ Be) ae ' ‘
§ | $ g ist a ie
| : a *go[VUIa,T } H *
cit 5 ze : : :
E { ;
i | $ Fy ‘so[UT ; ee. el Sie Rabat | 5
o | 3a “130, r= *ReR eT Ts
| cS mor) 3 + oR
fa | Ey x ves h, : H
| |
8 a ‘soTBULaT ides eK Soe Nace | | 8
| Ss ‘ : |
a | 3 ‘ '
: | 3 “SOLVIT OO oS 8
| r=] :
| £ an :
. Nn — ’
3 mo! $8 RRBR | | g |
| < GE BT RN ae ak Py
; 3S soe TT aati Ri i Ea :
33 gehageseb gq
| Es age Ph ae ca ee RN $
é eaeeeeee “
| & 5 a
ee)

i]
THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. : = 65
} | | | *"sOTBUIOZ OT} 0} WI0g ete eee eon eat eT ep Met la ser eel eet, |
| r | @ | Waappyyo yeap Jo Joquna pepsooay RAP gh aed Sah syh a En |
| -_ } hes * r . . . . . + . = eve |
3 | fl | “WOAPTIYO BOP CARY 0} pep100a;{ ic act ach bcs Pg Om Pak Fed TEN (a
| 1 3 | f easy LESTER Ded ARSON esta bales hte
| r | i) | [BOT |
A | | ~ ‘S9[VUl 9} 0} GA0g Rag AOR TR TRE ES Tene RE Oa Fey ents
| ° ¢ | g | MOIPTTyo yeep Jo doquina paproooyy | RE A TI Couaerseratc ora reer eseat |
| 2 | * r 7 . : : : . :
| f2 3 *UIIPTIGO JBop OAvt, 0} papsooay Peet at SRR Ac a iol Cosa fk wn
a | SE SERRL Ic oy mE cine AME pe
: | | [VO | : ‘ , aw & 2 He A |
3 | ‘eidnd 043 0} us0q PERSE ROS aks 0 a Stee ea 2a aa
| 3 We | MOADHTYO Jvep JO Joquud paps099yT PARES VM pices YiSeele eee TE mie Rea ars Su AEN |
| i | g | “maaptryo JBOP GAT] 0} pops09eyT Pert et i : ; |
aa Ton} bbb eo Re Bees |
| | | geruUTey 047 09 tLI0G (MU ERS RCL NTN ibe GE a
FA | WoLpTyo Jvep Jo oquind pop1o9ay CEES) ‘ P ‘ pees ae ‘ o "i : ‘ ‘ |
p | | q “UdIP[IYo JBOp OALT 0} POplOdyy Hed Men myers art Rea sie foal ts nt ee Be |
: | & Rea tNee MTN e a Mah ery i oe et ew Me ww So | :
8 | UEC Aral ete iter nat ica Uae PA eee | :
g ¢ Ppt |
2g *8O/VUL OY} 0} TOG fl) at are eee oan 3 Bae : |
' 2 z UOApP[{YO Jvop Jo soquna popsodayy CES Maat Ay Nash } |
— “4 Z | Ries Wn H , ‘ ‘ ie Pe aN : ‘ |
Ke 2 a “UOAPTIYo JBop OAvI[ OF PoplOVVy | | FG Et it | i
S 8 Lael — — _ —- ‘ ud rd u MW } Mi
>) Cua seme ee ena et — ona 2 I 0 \ 4
. z ‘TBO, ' ‘ ‘ aor a
Ss Fi ss a foment §
3 | @ s | ‘sttdnd oq) 07 aa0q DEA tady domeaeeaeteea ene Weet :
S 3 | | UdIP[Iqo Juap Jo doquind pap1099yy : ‘ ‘ : PACU | ‘ : : ‘ | i
5 3 ; Bie foe an tse nme ey eos MEER
3 | 6 ‘MOIP[IYO Jvap oAvy 0} pap109eyT Peet atte a i ot ;
= | | wa Lave? tay : : f pas TN q
= x | wor} | |; "88 ean” |
S fe | i . of q
gy 3 | ‘SO[VULOZ OY} OF TI0G toh aa CR oy eateries eaten |
wm | UIIP[ITO Jvap Jo soquinu paps09ayyT PR en ee Be rato ip q
sq | a ah Aha ike PA DR I SINS Sette Le el Raa ae anit 4
Ss | | & Re Se eRe ata aa gies Te a %
S ZB FA ‘UOIP[IYo JROp GAVT, 0} popsovay pod ear oie sa Pk tM a ‘
y > J | 8 Patani ath ie thes Sua can Git at sans
=” OC | | fx a ;
eae | ie eae ae oe 4
ee ] [VIO], uly ge ae) :
a | | es on :
Ss 4 | | *so[VIU OT} OF T10g ona Varad Sam ESC So = al &
2 | UIP JVop JO Joquintt paps09ayy Hamers (oes an io | ‘
8 | 3 a aa a} Pee Pa aan F
2 | $ a ‘MOP [IYO JVap AVY 0} popsovdy ie ae a can to a
; | a! 3 ; gts bt
eq | : ; i++ se & 2 au f
| THIOL, ae rg er arias i
x | ‘stidud an} 0} wWi0q Pa te his GRIME gaa baat } }
foo] UWAIp[TO Jap JO Lequinu peps09ayy Pea an CUI aT Me at RC | d
ge ee ey a ai a ;
a 3 TAIP[LYD JBop OAVI[ 07 pop.1099xy eenkbt eto ut eet |
Ps | a is Die OE A a ea Les
i + § 8 ow YT Bee” |
| ‘TROL \ ‘ ’ * a oO id ° Lan! |
is iM f : : H j tg
, £. | “sa BMoT Py tT RRR A SB |
35 eee:
ie zf maa
| ie | TOG We i ede ee oe ae ya
8 8 | (VIN Poets a ‘i
38 | | iim *®RepeeRrgeanite |
Za | “1PIOL £y) ' aos |
| . | ‘SO[VULT a aan “S888 88 |
| ro | 4 :
| $ 7
° | . ' ‘ u om &
| | wwe) fo bv 2 ee ee gy |
. . . |
é | ‘ tet cy oe
5 | ‘won| tt a 8 38 8 z a
3 leeegeeeeege 3
3 =e EeE & 2
‘e. 3 7 2 3 Ln} my Lod a om a
! jiadi
. | EEERER EE

|
|

}

pice |

99 A--BELL 29

66 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

|
|
|
!

Land I] - — © ou 8 ian]
“SOU ee 8G

Grand total.

; ‘sojuUey ONFOJUION = == |. i Ned acter
. S | VOIP oO Jusp Jo Laqund popslo9ay | Baber onia aes kY LN us
| 3 Fy MAIP[}YO JVaP GAUVI O} popsooeyy hy eee tie | :
3 at mae :
Z ic BUIUN A ‘ o- i! i ‘ | iy
FS = ~*HO[UI OG} OF MI0q PAE Thies AT wu | rs
og g | MOP TIqo Jvap Jo doquuud pep tooay eet ai eied ed
$2 3 ‘MAIP[IGO JRop BAB 6) Popsooay Laas ei SO AL Mac RE Se | be
a : ean a penis 3
yy ‘wor | 7} i a i a | -
Ye ea ‘stdnd oq) 0} ua0q : Mit ee teats Oe ine at | eee
| | H |, | Motpyyo Jvop Jo doquna popdooo | St tt
| 3 5 TAP YO JVap Arutl 0} papiosdy " ee | ‘ : | =
A [WOT aa NM HM : : ' | 9
| |” Pr gay Bay O11) OF WI0G PRRCORC™ AUT RE ep era pan PRET ee
| | | g | Meplyyo Jap Jo doquind pops09eyy bates: ‘ tet Ie
| | ~~ = aes rf = Pmt . . . ais |
3 | | 3 | ‘UAIP|IO JLOP GAvY 0} paps0oay Ue PH Lt peters: ee entoteei ne | bce
| ’ i> - a a Nn ‘ ' q
z | | AE ai a) a a Kut &
3 | | | ye : iii : bot
| . | ] . ' ’ . . . ‘ i |
=| | | 8 | “SOTVULE OY} 0} T10q SRO oti et ct ok Lea
5 | reel UOIPTITO Juop Jo Jaquind paps0d99yy ot ae Ren Nee
bias i hogeh (eeerest ao 2th Ss SRR aN a Te A ne
! | § 3 “MAIP[IYO JVap OAVY OF pap10d0y | Ti te goes ome ag Sa ER:
o | | ib Ss : : ‘ : : : :
Re | - | ime © Om we Ft &
. feces tcata | WOT | 8: p qves %
‘- a — | E i - " ~ ~ |
+3 | a S | ‘srdnd 049 0} a10q AR ae ae = |
= 4 | | UAIP[ITYO JVop Jo dequinu pop1o0deyy Hina Keane Waa an |
s CN tess Sa: ees |
> Mic (oa ees tt orto ult | a |
< UMPTTO JVap OAvy 0} papsoday A | |
*% ss | iets so |
8 P = ’ sae oy |
=e 6 | | SC ce ae
3 8 | wou pei rgiak
a ; — -
ee Bir 5 | | *BOTVULJ OI[} 0} 10g | bola Se Paoasacd) “Aa AE ad et gel nm
Ss 5 | . UdIP[YO JVap Jo Jaquind psp1odv0y : : : : : ‘ '
a ox a . : .
71 S| fe mt st omen Sen (sect |
= 4 | | ‘@ | ‘HOIP[IYO Jap BAVY 0F Paps1096 aah ze gelerte ty sau | a |
a ie Yinr'4 wat eee
5 5 | al 1 Ob ote ae ea TRS tt }
- z H “TRIOT, : neg ea by |
Ss | aa Soa es :
Ss S| | *BO[VUT Of} 0} TLLOG WIND i ees eae &
| WOIP[LYO Jvop Jo caquinu pap.090y Ges Sat
> . —* Saat
> a g gba Abate cree Fy Ne AS Ss a
Ss 5 ic UOAPTETO JBop AAUT OF PopAOIIT eis Tea a
ss | bet
= | et wa 6 i a
S POT, We ae Reha | 3
= ; :
> | ‘sptdnd oy} 07 10g es SRY ' H : =
= UPTO JRop JO oq ue papsooay : ; ; ‘ : H i : ~
s ee H :
ze a tomo : °
| = “WAIpTnp Jvap erLvl, OP pap1odayy ' : $
. a . J
= wmon| " ~ a & & i | %
fa :
=| 4 > 4
S Bote: *sa[VUa “S58 8 | ES)
- 3 a arena
$ g “‘SO[UIY : =a 8 2 iS $7 | 3
4 2 !
$4 moe! " Bes Re | =
denen: | PO OR Ree | 8
| | mo! " "S82 b ea” | a |
‘s (i? Bus AR ng) an Ha é P|
: | 2@8ge8¢22828 |
a a
| 38 |ReRS 228 6
B ddggaaad °
RSSRRARG

|
|
i
|
|
|
!
!
|
i
|

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RAOR. 67

‘SOMO, OT LOP MEd

% g (CDEP) Fuap Jo Loqind pop.ovayy : ' ! ! : ' ‘ ! : Bite i |

3 3 HOAP[[O JOP BUTT OF Papaovoyy ‘ Met NN eed ‘ '

% | . et Jatt tt

q GT A At ee ea a A Ge a

$ *SOTUINL OY) OF TOG re a oR GE aie ‘

2 a ¢ Hoaplio Juep Jo coquinn popsoveyy Foes Rept mie, Sap cuutee A ut er Wer :

» . . : . : . . . . . :

| | 82 | ‘a | ‘UOIPTIYO JRApP OAT, 0} papsodayy BE ea sth BE COR a ee Eee bem cs :

| ga | # Sneath ain Sat ant Se ante aie Eee te Gee ee ;

|g | *[ey07, iN os ant gi ees ae ar Namah | :

| 3 | ‘sqdud oy) 0} m10q FF Rr Se aE RE: ‘ :

| 3 UBIP[TGO Jvap Jo aoquinad popsoo9ayy [ead RRR Tat lcs Ce NOt Re Cea ‘
| (3.9 $ | ‘USIP[[YO JVap VAT 0} pop10d9yy Heer Ni aac an Lat a ate RN MC ae
3 PS) eid 5 ACAD Aion NOS UC REY Ge ATUL cM Ray Sn

| ir eg a SS i AA
| | “so[uUay OY} OF 0G Wan onl Pn RON eg Feeec Rains
| | UAP[MTO Jvap JO dyqQunu paps10dayy LLIN Seite NaS Stra rane Wh tO ca Eb cgerr said ym e E
|

| “UPIP [YO JBap BABY 07 Pepsooayy AAALCAST Ad iak) GRRMEE SRG etc AAS aha ico a

mop) vob Piababod i

g | “ga [VU OT} 07 TI0q ee Ae Aa ea AI UN SMR at
=] | UaIp[yo Jvop Jo soquina popaoooyy sf ff tt UE UE Ut UE Et !
Yael eae a
| | 3 3 | ‘UdEPILYD JROpP DAVY 0} pap.loOdayy ‘ F ' : : 4
| Sey REALTOR Wi aoe Sra ay Te
.| | ‘ Fah ee ea CECB Or RS Ty BA Ma alae a UEOLUAED CWE : a
| [BIOL ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ; H H ‘ ‘ ‘ H ‘ a
| & t a) LAO SEA tHE LO Ie Aeon ee et aN ‘
FI 3 | | ‘stidnd ayy 0} W104 PUTS Mr a Lone SLE RR : 4
| 3 | | UdIP[IG) Jvsp JO daqunu papsodayy | ened es Sie Peel eek etre Dean eat : 3
| | 2 | ‘UdIP[IYO JVap GALT 0} Pop.Lodayy : : i Tea y hy i : 4
B | Lea RS ER : ae ie : ‘ i
|

| WIOT, UI aut HERG Rte eat NE

|

|

|

|

| ‘saTBIlas AIT) OF T10q BH a eC Ber
| H
|

|

|

|

'

|

TABLE I.—Pupils the cause of whose deafness is not stated who are recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children.
AMERICAN ASYLUM

_ | UOIp]Iqo Jvap Jo aoquund popsooayy RAMEE hot et autor } tyes H
5 NOIP[YO JVop ABT, 0} paps1090y POM tlic ai fs ORR Sal A A a
o : . ‘ : H , ; ‘ iH : : :
| ‘1101 HR Stk Mn Se rs Mn Sa i RS OUT vt ‘
| | pt! fon tanh ‘4
“SOLVE OTT OF TLIOK OE tara Semen Kirk De OM eR Ke tre a Rar
| GaIp|Iqo Jeep Jo doquind pap..ooay 4 ; H ‘ : : H ; ; : ‘
| a3 L Rue Peines Clr tats) et
| 24 ‘HAIPTUPD Jap 9Avq 0} popiodsay Be ROR Sei) be CA, EASE Mee Haas ae bolts g :
| BA | 3 gt OCS ogee
| | TOE || ae a Ra a aR Gree !
| | | ‘sptdnd ayy oF u10q pee diy act rae : f
| MeIp[Iyo Jvap Jo adequinu pepsodeyy Sen iain TE an fe Baie e ' ;
| ' | é ‘UdLPTTYO Jap OAVT, 0} pops0dayT Fes ane RI RE SR Coe a Ga : '
| ea ee a ae : } | F
| H ‘18101, Popa ttn tabbee nba tee hay hina mas aie | y
| | . ‘ ' ' . ' ‘ ' . . ' . . f
Se tt a
o : : : ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ [om Oo re} ES
=. ‘sOTBIIA ar SAU ae, aa A Sen aT Sta cai i
3 Re Mit a ER ed SM Ni NY Rai i
3.2 4 + ' . + . Ey
Ee ‘ : ‘ ‘ : yo : : a 7 : ey | D
58 ds 2 a Oro Pe past ‘ | :
Ee aa — :
i ‘ ' ‘ ‘ ‘ io ‘ n © #4 Ss ’
| Ss ‘BIOL Peete sede SRNode Bist FY | ki
| a UPSOR EAB | hia Wal qlee "i
| ‘ Carpe a io Seis Win ata PT ces tr mrt
y ‘sO[VIAT TUS VAM Cees tor eae ee ae CI St Oi
a : : . ‘ H $ ° ‘ °
$ - ; 7
3 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ x ‘ mm 68 ‘ tod |
| = al 3 Ve oe a a |
| =I ; Liye SE ; i
| g . ae RE pee
Hats : ier tia anes Sot Fay
Ki ia Se ve Ga ane en Sag |
/ met Saas —— |
| Ros PEER AT ie as OR ht AU PCT TRE hy aA AR aa |
os } Py . . r . ’ . . . q
o: 22e22e2s88888 E g |
33 FEERekS SB BBE BSB SE =
| ES 3 z 3 2 Bake ae ata cate oe oH |
1 oA | Ses :
| Pu | fe = @ & =I & Pa DS g 3 iB
| = Sal al - A onl - - we sel Sl - _

TABLE I.—Pupils the cause of whose deafness is not stated who are recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children—Continued.

ILLINOIS INSTITUTION.

MARRIED.

Not recorded to have married deaf-
mutes.

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

|

Married to deaf-mutes.

Total.

Not recorded to
have married.

Grand total.

Males. Females.

Total.

Males. Females.

Females. Total.

Males.

Total.

|

|

| Period of
birth

| "VOL,

| “SOB; Ot[} 0} UG
| UBIPTIYO Jvap Jo aoquuna poprosay

| ‘UOIP[YO JUOP EAU OF papsoooy

3 ~ *Bo[UU Ot} 0} ULOq

| UoAp|Yyo Jvop Jo Loquinu papaoaay

| ‘Meap{tya Jvop eavy 0} papaodeyy
“(BOL

| ‘epidnd or 07 a10q aay

| WaIpTYO Juap Jo Aoquinu papsooayy

“WAAP[YO JwOp AAUTT 0} popaodoy |

‘THOL

~ *BaTVUIIZ Ot[} 0} 1L10Q_
UEIP[IYo Juap Jo Aequinad pepsodoy

‘UAP[IYO Jvop dAvy 0} pap10dayy
‘Hol

“sa[UIL Ot} 0} UWL10q
WaIp[LYy) Juop Jo JoqUNU popLovay

‘UdIP[[YO Jvap CART] OF POps10daqT
‘T!OL

| ‘stidad aq) 0) u10q
UdIP[IYO Jvop JO Joqunu pops0990y

‘UOIPTIYD JBap Avy 07 pepszonoy

“THIOL

*‘BOTBIAZ Ot] 0} LLOQ
TWIIP[Yo Jwop Ju Loquind pop1099yy

MOAP[IYO JVap VAvT] 0} papaoovoay

“[RIOL,

*SOTBUL OTT} 02 U.LOC
UOIP[TYO Jvap Jo soquind papaloovay

UdIPLLO FLIP VARY OF POPLOIY

"[BI0T, |

‘sqrdnd oy} 0} w10q
) UoIpyo yvop Jo Joquina papsoday |

‘dolp, [0 FVaP DAVY 0} Ppspsodayy |

‘TROL

*BO[BUI8T
‘so[UT

*[eyoL

‘so[VtUaT
‘SoU
|

"TRIO, |

| 1810-1819...

1

| 1820-182...

a

| 1830-1839 ....

a

4
13
13

| 1840-1849...

| 1850-1859 ..

| 1860-1869...

1870-1879. ...

| Unknown ...

21)

:
3
%
2
>
8
a]
vo
S
:
s
NM
8
3
8
eS
3
=
9
*»
=
3
eo
3
>
s
Sy
ro)
3
S$
>
8
8
*)
&
=
c=
‘&
=
AY
|
ar)
|
=)
io*]
<
&

AMERICAN ASYLUM.

MARRIED.

| Not recorded to |

Not recorded to have married deaf-
mutes.

Married to deaf-mutes.

have married.

Grand total.

N OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE,

A ‘sa[Utlay 04} 04 TL0q
| MOAP YO JVop Jo aoquunu popsoooyy

g
q | *UOIP[IYO JVOp GALT 0} Popzodeyy
2
&

‘TOL

; | *salUI OT} 04 HU0K,
| UaIpIIqO Juop Jo Joquinu pepsoooy

*UOAP[IYO JuOp OANT 0} pops099yT

‘THIOL

‘stidnd of} 09 d10q
MAIpT Yo Fop Jo dequinu popi09ay

*‘UOAPIYo yvap OAVY 0} paps000yf

“(BIOL

‘so[BMay ON} OF TAOQ
THO TTF RAL FO AAQUUUT PAPLONOY.

“MO IPL Juap Aut, OF papaovay

MLLELLA A

*SO[BUT At} OF tLLOG
| GoIpTyo Jeop Jo doquuu pap.ovey

‘UOIP[IYD JVOp OBI 0} pops0d99y

MLSE

| ‘stidnd o14 0} U10q
UaIp[lyo JVop Jo JoQuING pop10dayy{

*MAUpTI[9 Jap Gav 0} Poplovdy,

"[RIOL

*solBtuay Ot} 07 UI0G
DOP [GO Jvop JO oquinu pop100ey

MOIP[IYO JVOP OAV] OF papsoday

Females.

THOT, |

4
“SOTLUT OTT] OF C0
VOApPT MD Juap Jo AAqUnd pap tory

‘UOAP[LD JUOP GALT, OF POPLOIVY,

‘(OL

‘sqtdnd oq} 07 W.10q
| maappiyo Jeep Jo Joqiuuu papslodsoy

UOAp[HO Uap GAUL OF P PLOIDY
“TROL

‘so[VUlIT

“BOTET

TOOL

“sol VULagT

“BOTRL

‘TRIO, |

1760-1769 .... .

teeelecee)

1810-1819 ....

1820-1829 - - --

1830-1839 . .-.

1840-1849 .

1850-1859 - ...

1860-1369 ....

| Unknown ...

|

70 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENOES.

l j j ‘BOT NMJ OT} 04 TAOq IU wit Kec vahew tte: cpm ot at
; 1 | 1 g | WaApTTo Jvop Jo doquind peprooyy ‘ Fh nats OR AS et | H
| pt 4 | *HOAPTIYO JUOP OAVY OF popi0d9ey | TO be | rant Cant iis ante ny | i
| 5 ; poofeta tet ot
ee I ee a ee |
i" Bd | *HO[VUL OY} OF ILLOq LT UA Ad iol SARIS NT | :
" it 2s Fi UOAp[TYO Jvap JO doquind pop.i09eyy ‘ : : Sian elt te ta! | :
. hy $8 3 *UAAIP[ID JUOP OAVT, OF pop1090y CCT Ve a Famke fect et RS pata | :
4 os | ‘og on “hd Lae aie HR SSRI faa Pa :
; = ‘ | ERY, PEA Rat ae | :
oy) | % Gere Re tics. Me eS 2 a
; i P | 3 “s[ydud 049 0} at0q ape NNT A a teen a a :
. bet 3 H |, _MOApIiTo Uap Jo doquunt poproooy ORS eat SDE ae | ‘
: i * g / 3 3 *MOIP[O JVAP OAUT, OF Pap.1090x7 i H : ' :
cw 2 | A . “wo ‘ ‘ ar] a pa : ‘ hire "¢
iL Re es a H bs
b 3 a) | | *BOTUUTA) Of} OF IL10q EO SARS SS Set (a Pe A ae i
i 1 | Fy UdIP[IyO FRoOp | tulV isa cg bh gee thee, Fuge we | ‘
x | q “UIIP[M]O JVIP DAVY, OF PopsoOoMy | teat ‘ Pete seo ek E | H
‘ 8 s Rar ret a tee te)
B 3 | f(t 7) ene me i Aue) age | i
3 ————— = a
3 = *SO[BUL O1[} 0} U.0q } ot ob esl eee ot 4
5 2 5 TOIpypO Juop JO soquina paps09ey, H Ram eda Oe ae
Ei f Srearne : HO ei Ma ye
4 &, a3 feet nage clihe cmt anieest, GPRallcprlah
a is a ‘MAIP[INYO JBOP OAVT, OF POps09eyT, ‘ eke le el thet (Sash ea
a 8 8 a ey pat ot RNS ‘ : 3 H et
% 3 F Z NEO E Oaa tetere tie SB | vr
i > 2 a een eer eer er eee eee
—) S 3 | ‘sttdnd oy) 07 u10q Pah yak! Yoreaos Nie tee ar tame eG ay
4 8 3 | UdIp[Iqo Jeep JO dequinu pep10dsey est UG Sr faba Fes HA DRT? ae =
| : he et : : sa
es Pd g | “UdIP[IYO JVop VAVY 0} pop1090yT ‘ Te We ERY ett
a 8 : Be a eee : pie Lee SIU
i PA | | ‘ 65) Hie ee Se
4 = S | e103, | oan] : an ww : ‘ | s
nf a : tg t
| x B *BO[RUIOZ OI[} 0} T.10¢ Ppp das te UP RSM :
4 I UIIP[IYo Jap JO Jequinu peps0va yy SG Seas We Oe el ae
a 8 & | ¢ |—_—_-—_—_————— 57 ER! SS We SG] Vana ae |
Bi q | zg ‘WOIPTID JBOP OAV] OF pops099yT i | : i i ot | :
‘ ’ 1 -« ’ ‘ |
BF | HOT, vat a | is
2 A | rr tare é
gS 8 | *SO[VUL OY} 0} U.10q beet f ON Feat =
€ UdIP[IqO Jvap JO loqunu papi0vey | : ys iy nie
a $ 4 | 3 : ; eee Nutt hf Lak ERAS ERLE Is ete ea PPeee Wt
od s | *UAIP[IO JVOP OABT] OF Pops00ayT H PERSO Pens vee ms |
: ais Sus eh ies LS aN
8 | ; i ”
= | 1¥q0], ; H $ :
4 | : : i 8 phy,
> ‘stidnd ay) 0} w10q Nanri eas etm ph ates =
bd | UWaIp[Iyo JRop Jo Lequinu paps10903T Wd ialiel Hees, Mie FORPT AL En ie die
*® es : Seley ; Veen
s | & ‘MAIPTIYD JVOpP CARY 0} Peps099yy AB ie? i hie eA Ca aa Sea es
} S | a : ee Soe 0 ae ee
& : Peale
Ss | won pe ate AG | 5
7 & é ; 53 : A hos he
, 4 8 raw mh he Oo Oo HK Ft
} & 3 “so [VNIA,T Sent pe | %
cy Ey: ssh Ie care ornare ES
| Sa ‘Sot Fe eR & |
~ » LJ 2 o ;
} my ar ee 4 A an] cal + anes ERTS eget |
I, | ta ‘THIOL a aSSBE : | Rg |
a Bho cae aie ee bmi ma
a a *so[UmMay Bia cll aA bd
3 - ; ; mel
3 *BOTUL esi cA 8 SR : | §
FA H ee a
4 oS ya t+ B@Yags : nc)
: *1VJOT, and a a oo y 8
q 24 Sges B g FA E 3
BE we ee ee Ae ee
BS 1 e222 Se ee
; m4 (2882826 =F
bE | ee oe | p

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 71

TABLE K.—Non-congenital pupils.

|
| American Asylum. Illinois Institution,

Period. Classified accord- Classified accor

ing to period ‘
when hearing | ne period
was lost. CoH DANAE

g. | Classified accord-

ing to period
when hearing
as lost,

Classified accord-
ing to period of
birth,

1760-1769 dea suereeligs Kx
VTTOFLTTD > ve cans csaccese seveccsacases|ecees
VEL OU iv acsescovzigdswee ceaseesaeee]

LOVOMIWTA: co sce csccepecscesa>
Unknown ...... 2... .02. een ee

TABLE L.—Non-congenital pupils of the American Asylum, classified according to the period when
hearing was lost and according to the disease that caused deafness.

| ay WMA |

Cause of deafness,

1780-1789.
1800-1809
1810-1819
1830-1839
1840-1849.
1850-1859.
1870-1879

Scarlet fever!

Brain fever?

Epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis *
MEBAIOM aha trades) cc cirnesegiesiecescensealive sees
Whooping-cough

Hydrocephalus‘

Typhus fever

| Convulsions®

| Disease of ear®

| Diseases of lungs and air passages’
Miscellaneous diseases®

Accident?

| Diseases not specified

1Inclndes canker-rash (15 cases). ? Includes inflammation of brain, inflammation of head. *Tncludes spotted fever (51 cases), meningitis
3eases). ‘Includes dropsy in head, dropsy in brain, water on brain. § Includes tits, paralytic tit (1 case), paralysis and convulsions (1 case).
“Includes disease in head, humor in head, abscess in head, eruption in head, gathering in head, serofula in head, sores in head, ulcers in head,
ulcers in ears, sores in cars, discharge from ears, gathering in ears. 7 Includes lung fever (11 cases), cold (18 cases), influenza (1 case). §In,
cludes small-pox, chicken-pox, diptheria, croup, bilious fever, catarrhal fever, erysipelas, palsy, salt rheum, mumps, spasmodic cough, mar-
asmus, rickets, teething, cholera infantum, inflammation of bowels. 9 Includes fall (39 cases), discharge of cannon, pistol-shot, scald (2 cases),
fright (2 cases), blow on head, run over by cart, sea-bathing.

72 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL AUADEMY OF SCLENORS,

TABLE M.—Non-congenital pupils of the Illinois Institution, classified according to the period when
hearing was lost and according to the disease that caused deafness,

ye Seite aol etl A d
Cause of deafness. ; m i i i i z & : =
5 i : 2 | : : : | 3 | Z
Spotted fovor "...... ceccce sees sccclsocceslsocces Jesseeel se eee 2 27 12 | 7 | 48 |
| Meningitis®........cccseseseseeses 4 reso Bae ee asesaih 6 29 143! 179.
| Searlot fever oes sseeseseceseeeceee sesees ceeees |} 6] 18} 99! w| -o| gf | 110
| Brain fever ............+--5. eee bilhcehcalceewuelaceeat 6; 9) 81 17, 10|. 73)
| Inflammation of brain. ..........2. .. eens eee e ee Leauas 5 2 4 2 12 | 25
| Congestion of brain ..........- ++. tldensoelsetaws lecneds 1 2 BH sees 5 | 11 |
PIkena CR ANB Nee cs sbayesiec sacievscloceces 1}; 1) 7] S| 16] -38! gal 6!
Diseases of lungs and air passages? . ...... 1 | 1 7 | 6 6 12 17 | 50 |
WS MOULUENER::.cceccduvecoscses PARAS RT A Ra UR ee a ae
| MOAR OM ii sadsecadescnneesccaeaesedlesee'’s aeey et liven 4 6 8 8) 1 | 37 |
| Typhoid fever. ...... 2-02-20 0 cece seeeee Ml eeeees 3 8 14 6 5) 37 |
| Whooping-cough ...... ...c0. eee ene cee eee ee eeee 25 4 2 3 1 | 8 20 |
QR URIROH ER oc lee dotoye sees Fae t Werke OR Deere 5 2. 6 | 1 3 | 17 |
QUITE Gia hele ei ca vadccateresbasdelscecan|eaweas 1 1 6 Oe eee 3 14
| Hydrocephalus....-. 2.22. cece eens ceeeee ceeeee 2 2 4 Rl seceeelscsese 10
| Diphthertas. 55... cece sees seceeccaliecess | jwedmeldpeeciteecses 1 4 | 1 4 10
Miscellaneous disenses*.. 2.02. ..-.!secees sooeee 1 24 14 17 6 19 81
Diseases not specified ............. .---.. 1 6 23 30 36 8 18 122
VOHL fee Silvddnes addeeorreaees 1 5 21 116 133) 224. 120 BRAT 947

*Epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis.

‘Includes gathering in head (3 cases), scrofnla (10 cases), gathering in ears, sore ears, earache, rising in head, risings, swelling in head,
gradual loss, inflammation of head, sickness in head.

2Includes cold (31 cases), lung fever, pueumonia, bronchial attection, influenza, catarrh (5 cases).

3Includes shock of lightning, sunstroke, exposure to heat, fell into water, sea-sickness, burn, scald, sprain in neck, tar cap for scald-head,
washing in cold spring, fright (2 cases), fall (22 cases), drinking lye (1 case).

4Includes spasms and fits.

Includes mumps (7 cases), bilious fever (9 cases), nervous fever (6 cases), congestive chill (7 cases), winter fever (8 cases), remittent
ever (3 cases), teething, jaundice, pernicious fever, worms and fever, ague, paralysis, vaccination, small-pox, chicken-pox, cholera, croup,
cramps, chills, cold plague, worm fever, typhus fever, cholera infantum, inflammation of bowels, disease of kidney, cancer, rickets, erysip-

elas, spinal disease (6 cases).

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RAOCR, 73

TABLE N.— Analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns, showing the number of
these deaf-mutes living June 1, 1880, who became deaf each year since the year 1770,

|
|
Year, | No, | Year, No, Year, No, Year, | No |
| |
| LRP icv isi bod<aecccclacd veges | 1a60-'70 71 185960 27 1849-50 | 453 |
pt | a 161 186360 665 436 1848-'49 219 |
TET TM UG iv vceoevstansede 207 | 1867-68 721 484 1847~"48 | 264
| 187677... 06 cseee: over 300 1866-67 710 402 184647 QL
1) SPRZDO Osi vececscecsvces 414 1865-66 74 422 1845-46 | 230 |
| WRREW ID: cvcce veceds cae 472 1814-65 707 349 1e44-"45 308 |
° | SBABOTR, ccaceceencr ones THO LA63-"64 776 f f Se 1843-44 237 |
1) MEENA nee eece eded Secs 1, 168 1862-63 602 1852-53 303 1m42-"4:3 209 |
| WBTLAITR. .ccoecaccereees 1, 067 1861-62 642 1k51~52 340 Is41—42 215 |
| 187071 ...... eee: ; 760 1860-61 470 1850-"51 260 184041 153 |
Ten years... ...... 0.06065. G808 | cceatexerat TOUR lievaneiavwes GB, OLA! lncdecussucse 2,509 |
|
| 1BBO-'40... 0... cece eee 31s 1820-30 200 1819-20 147 | 1809-10 81
LIOR HOU va cscivieceusene 130 La2e-’20 O38 181R-"19 54 | 1~08~09 36
SODIMOB ss icedstuvieecces 158 1827-28 111 1817-18 ve 1807-08 46
POO iic cnew eves tees 135 1826-27 05 1816-17 77 | 1-06-07 15
1835-'36 0.20. cee eens 125 1825-26 Hs) 1815-16 73 | 1805-’06 27
| 1884-'86........... iQue 18+ 1824-25 120 ISLI~'15 83 1804—"05 37 |
TSSSWUA. .. cc ccccteces 141 1av3—24 RR 1813-14 49 | 1803~'04 23
} {5S 3 Ss 126 La22-"23 ag Lal 13 4h | 1802-03 11
fi SEBO s valence abe ea'ttha es 157 Lazl—22 100 I8tl-"12 55 | 1801-02 ll
| 1SB0sBL cic cee dvcecs voce 105 1820-21 67 IR1011 | 43 1800~’01 7
DOW VOR ess xedeccds ceeel LOR | seccses VervecliLPOBOa ls cnaseaeeons CORO ee aes 204
|
| 1799-1800.........2.. 006. 23 1789-90 3 V779"8O eee Biliace sha kd centsas abode
I” WRZUMOO soit a's + orsste'sep eee 10 1788-'89 | ..,..... LET O shigves cele vin-wneempodeluag creed
1797-"98..... ie cra cen pe 11 1787-88 2 VEOTIIS lave swe bel ebdapareneees evebeees
hh SHAUUMU hese ce veers. ves ee 6 WIBOMBT Nececlsidcs| | TRCIOMEL: [savtiewaclocesabenedes heveeuene |
AD yf!) | 4 1785-86... eee LTFBAIG. [acs cacalice sashes tiauscen cs
1794). ccs cece scones 4 17R4-'85 4 RELA TUS ldeaecrireliacarearaatelereinue
| VOR GA assis icsclerecesies 8 1783-'84 | ..000.-- BELOW! jleed caecelbasner voewerlsenm snes
1! SUD UD csinacviedevsseces 1 178283 |... eee ee WRIST leas ccdeclooehecredeeslivesuesian
UOT SUR vs a siecseeecs.s'ens ‘ 78182 |... TGs Seve cselousatele soe kalebmbarce |
I) LEGUSU Me seadinccesscede 1 1780-81 |........ 1770-71! Li iepewecCaaveathate sees
| Ten years.......--.+----5 1 al Dee earascy DO iliseseraseees Li \vedeweve saat Porter c

TABLE O.—Analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns.

[This table shows that the decline in the number of these deaf-mutes retarned who became deaf
since 1573 affects the congenital, as well as the non-congenitally deaf. ]

| Year in which deafness occurred, 1873, 1274. 1875, 1876. 1877, 1878, 1879.
|
|
Totaknumber 2.2... cccceesccoccees 1, 168 750 472 414 300 207 161 |
Congénitally deaf.............-.-- 343 271 203 202 130 105 46 |
| Non-congenitally deaf............. R20 479 269 Q1z 170 102 115 |

99 A—BELL——10

74

TABLE P,—Analysis of

TABLE

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENOBS,

Period,

22,

472

Number,

L7OLLTEB i doc scccccce cocsvs 4
1786-1790. J... cece cece ees 5
1791-1705... 20. cececs cccnss 17
1796-1800... 0... cece ee eens 4
ROULMEOU co kev ccéece pauaes bait]
TRUGARO LO cidceskacdacerecer 20h
LUE eLOO isc sv usec vances | 275
1816-1820.........0..-2000.) 424
TROT eIOU Recs devcsceccntees 464
182U-1830.. 2... .ccce. coeees 504

Q.—Analysis of

781-1785
1786-1790
791-1795
1796-1800
1801-1805
1806-1810
1811-1815
1816-1820
1821-1825
1826-1830
1831-1835
1836-1840
1841-1845
1846-1850
1851-1855
1856-1860
1861-1865
1866-1870
1871-1875 2.2...
1876-1880 ........

Total

R.— Total number of deaf-mutes in the United States living June 1, 1880, classified according

Causes of deafness,

Congenital. .........-
Injury to ear......--.
Disease of ear........
Other diseases......-.
Miscellaneous ..:.....
Not stated

Total

99

“m5

Period,

Colorec

Males,

l'

Females,

Jive years.
10,000 cases in all.)

|
Per cent,

Period,

| Number, | Per cent, |

. 0002 TORS LEED ids devsdeee veces 717
. 0002 1836-1840 , 0.66. cee eee eens 875
. 0008 1841-1845... 06. cee eee e coon 1122
. 0024 1846-1850......... 2.2. 200. 1387
. 0040 18561-1855 ... 2... 1... ee eee | 1648
0001 | 1866-1860.............. 666. 2271
OU || 1861-18G5.............. cee 3377
. 0189 L8G6=1870. ode cccces os cece 3641
. 0206 BOT EPLOO ceeasianceecueese 4226
. 0265 1876-1880 ...... 2... 0.000 , 1082

to race and sex.

Foreign white.

Males. Females.

545
(as 2
10 | 7
306 | 25
81 | 77

Congenital,

Non-con-
genital,

0
0

2

6

10

43

82
145
136
171
240
274
403
492
645
809
1,738
1, 882
2, 641
599

12, 154

Males

| 9,249

Native white.

10, 318

. O819
. 0889
. 0499
O17
0731
. 1011
. 1508
. 1620
. 1881
. 0481

Total.

4

5

17

54

89
205
275
424
464
594
717
875

1, 122
1, 387
1, 643
2,271
3,377
3, G41
4, 226
1, O82

22,472

Total,

Kemsles,| Males.

| 166

| 423

| 6, 404

6, 488
49
221

| 18, 567
|

Females. |

5, 551

21

18

3, 767
52

5, 263

15, 311

cases of deaf-mutes taken from census returns, classified by periods of

[The number who became deaf in each quinquennial period is reduced to a percentage of the whole on a basis of

472 cases from the census returns, classified by periods of five years, and
separating the congenital from the non-congenital cases.

|

—

o

-_
we

| Kentucky Institution

| Portland Dav-School
| Rhode Island School

| Scranton Oral School
New Jersey Institution. ....,

Name,

American Asylum .........
New York Institution

Pennsylvania Institution...

Ohio Institution

| Virginia Institution...

Indiana Institution
‘Tennessee School
North Carolina Institution. .
Illinois Institution
Georgia Institution
South Carolina Institution
Missouri Ins itntion

Wisconsin Institution

| Michigan Institution. ...... |

Iowa Institution
Mississippi Lustitvtion
Texas Asylum
Columbia Institution. ......)
Alabama Institution........
California Institution
Kansas Institution
Le Couteulx 8. Mary’s In-
stitution,
Minnesota School
Institution for Improved In-
struction,
Clarke Institution
Arkansas Institute
Maryland School. ..........
Nebraska Institute...
Horace Mann School
St. Joseph’s Institute.......
West Virginia Institution ..
Oregon School
Institution for Colored
Colorado Institute
Erie Day-School
Chicago Day-School

; Central New York Institu-

tion.
Cincinnati Day-School

| Western Pennsylvania In-

stitution.
Western New York Institu-
tion.

Saint Louis Day-School ....

New England Industrial
School.
Dakota School. .... -.....

| Oral Branch Pennsylvania

Institution.

Public institutions .........)...2-. 2-22-22. -e eee

Location,

Hartford, Conn
Washington
New Yovk, N. Y. |
Philadelphia, Pa...
Danville, Ky......
Columbus, Ohio....
Stanuton, Va
Indianapolis, Ind...
Knoxville, Tenn...
Rale gh,N.C
Jacksorville, I...)
Cave Spring, Ga... .!
‘ar Spring, 8.C..|
s Ny MO vesesiecec
B: -ouge, I
Del ‘Vi
Flint, »
Couneil Binns, Iowa}
Jackson, Miss......
Austin, Tex... ...... |
Washington, D. C..!
Talladega, Ala.....!
Berkeley, Cal
Olathe, Kansas. ...
Buttalo, N.Y

is

Faribault, Minn....|
New York, N.Y. ....

Nortbampton, Mass.
Little Roek, Ark ...
Frederick City, Md.
Omaha, Nebr.......
Boston, Mass... ....
Fordham, N, Y
Romney, W. Va ....
Salem, Oregon
Baltimore, Md
Colorado Sp’s, Colo.
Erie, Pa
Chicago, D1
Rome, N. Y

Cineinnati, Ohio . dt
Turtle Creek, Pa...)

Roc..ester, N. Y....

Portland, Me
Providence, R.1....
Saint Louis, Mo....
Beverly, Mass.....-

Sioux Falls, D. T...}
Philadelphia, Pa...

Seranton, Pa....... |
Trenton, N. J

A.—PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS,

} Number of pupils,

During the year 1833.

Date of opening.

1817 | 210 126
1818 | 488 = 310 |
1x20 | 362-206 |
123 167 98
120 > 505) 274 |
1839 80 Ad |
1344 S24 175
1245 147 90
leat W4 56
1816 576 (35 |
1816 93 53
12419 58 26
iaDL 250 Hy
If 43 25
L 52 | 287) 134 |
18h4 271 145
1855 200 170
1856 7 35
1857 07 65
1857 100 83
1860 51 30 |
1860 126 80 |
4 61 190) 102 |
1862 | 167 94 |
L863 47 m2 |
1°67 187 108 |
|
1867 4 49 |
1868 0 47
1-638 108 60 |
1869 115 7A
1869 | OL 41
1869 | 279 125
1870 7 41
1-70 33 16 |
1872 16 8 |
74) 49 19 |
1874 12 9 |
1875 | 58 30 |
1875 | «180111 |
1875 35 Q1 |
1876 | 120 79 |
1876 | 162 81 |
1876 35 17 |
1577 33 16
1878 49 32
i8s0 19 ll
1880 2Q3 14
1881 73 45 |
1883 14 7
Leeean 6, 991 (3 898

|
|
|
|
|

Present December 1, 1-83.

104
501
&5

208
266

260 |
76 |

8b
88
51
121
157
154

1209
161

91
HY
99
93
80
Q37
60

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RAOER,

TABLE 8,—Jnstitutions for the deaf and dumb in the United States,

3,093 |5,993 | 23, 119

1883.

Admitted since the |
opening of the
institution,

number of pupils who
have received instruction.

one parent deaf.
both parevts deaf.

or both parents deaf.

Total
Total number having one

Number of pupils having
Number of pupils having

2, 325 23 35 fa |
2,003 SL} @) 53)
2,079 2 19 21
BOY licdeckhowsesetetonss
2, 008 2 IL 13
DSO ls cacdeleeveasionsees
L406 \iceceihivesselecnevs
1,700 5 9 14 |
GeO luckier locenesiivanas |
185 0 6 6 |
835 3 0 3
Peers tx) 0 3 ‘
665 3 1 4
948 |
657
203
480
185
262
369
350
330 4 1 5 |
311 0 0 0 |
220 2 1 3
LDS ficetesaleodeeslaaeace |
278 0 5 5 |
TBS acd nlonsoien tetas os
212 0 1 1
DOR ke Pas valvecdooplveness
199 0 2 2
72 0 0 0)
BOS cea Sol beaNehieswwe
70 1 0 1
Savewsioe 0 0 0 |
25 0 0, 0
2438 | nce éwelselecae os
| |
82 0 0 | 0
MOAT ecole becseteleseees
219 3 2 5
287
45
73
3
23
73
14

MEMOIRS OF TH! NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES,

TABLE S.—Institutions for the deaf and dumb in the United States, 1883—Continued.

B.—DENOMINATIONAL AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS.

| Admitted since the
opening of the!
institution,

Number of pupils.

3.
gone
eaf.

8 deaf.

Name. Location.

Number of pupilshaving

received instruction.

Total number havin

one parent deaf.

both parent

Total number of pupils who have
or both parents d

Present December 1, 188
Numberof pupils aving

Date of opening.
During the year 1883.

Whipple’s Home School ..../ Mystic River, Conn.) 1869 16 d 2 10 51
| German Evangelical Lu- | Norris, Mich 1875 ‘ 2 j 44 100
| theran Institution.
| St. John’s Catholic Institute | Saint Francis, Wis ., L876
| F. Knapp’s Institute .......) Baltino-e, Md
| Phonological School ....-..) Milwaukee, Wis....!
St. Joseph’s Institute Hannibal, Mo
| A. Gratiam Bell’s School....) Washington, D. C..
Voice and Hearing School..| Chicago, Ill
Denominational and private | 162
institutions, |

Institutions in the U. S..... 7,169 4,013 8,156 6,155 | 28,5 s3| 132 | 1215

| National College* | Washington, D.C ..) 1864 4545 CG) 384; 252

* The National Deaf-Mute College is a distinct orzavization within the Columbia Institution. Its officers and students are included in

the statement of thy Columbia Institution given above. —
tEliminatiny uses where same pupil is returned from more than one institution; 83 have oue parent deaf; 124 have both parents deat ;

total, 207.

TABLE T.—Deaf-mute offspring of deaf-mute parents.*
(Analysis of 215 cases received into Americar Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb before November, 1883.)
who have who have who hive = who have

one par- | both par- | one par- both par-
ent deaf, ents deaf, ent deef. ents deaf, |

Pernod of birth. Total, Period of virth. Total,

Deat-mutes Deaf-mutes Deaf-mutes Deaf mutes |
|
|

1771-1789 Se ik4i-1850 18
1781-1790 es LRd1-1860 25
1791-1800....... a erericn vl Pees 18H 1--1870 14
1801-1810... . we 1871-1880 6
1811-1820 ‘ ‘

1821-18380...

1831-18at

*A slight error has been discovered in the table owing to duphea'e returns in 8 cases, The general result, however, is not affected.
The correct figures for deafimutes having both parents deaf (reading down the colunm) should be 11, 20, 36, 87, 20; total, 124,

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 77

TABLE U.—Deaf-mute population compared with the population at large.

| 12,154 congenital deat-

Population of the United Deaf-mutes both of whose par-

| States (1880), classified et aang. B yey ents were deaf-mutes, clas-
| 1 “cor j ard 4 . , beats 3 > A i ‘ iff 4 ace wali i ari] J
| | | Agee rding to period of ing to period of birth, sified according to period of

| iirth, and the number
| of persons born iu each
period reduced to a per-

birth, and the number of
deaf-mutes born in’ each
period reduced toa percent- |

and the number of deaf-
! mutes born in each

\ Period of birth. ee MAREHA coat period reduced to s: per- AE tare ba
| centage of the whole. centage of the whole. age of the whole,
Deaf-mutes both
Number of |, Congenital ; of whose par- |p,
persons. Percentage deaftmutes, |Percentage. ants were deaf | Percentage.
j and dumb,
| - i ‘
| 1871-1880. .... 13, 394, 176 26, 7051 2, 068 19 14,%
| 1861-1870... 10, 726, 601 QL. 3866 | 3, 898 41 30.8
| 1851-1860. .... 9, 168, 393 18. 2798 2, 460 | 42 31.6
| | 1841-1850... 6, 369, 362 12. 6992 14 | 20 15,0
1831-1840. .... 4, 558, 256 9, 882 | 1,078 11 8.
1821-1830. .... 3, 111, 317 6, 20338 TOU AL of A OAION lek cioeigsewivis os tec ac eal oe stear sia’ tes
1811-1820. .... 1, 830, 095 3.6488 | BTA Se BESY SS as es oalsiaeeees Pe ae
1801-1810. .... 776, 507 1.5482 | MAL i NEOUS! Uleeiswissiseulecs tareeclsces Seehieees
| 1791-1800. ... 196, 197 0.3912 Gert s MOER TB aan aerss cake had ee olan tae ib se Seas
| 1781-1790. 2... 20, 863 0. 0416 Bot “ACOTE tac eid acted: fe oleties aittet eas eeres
——1780..... 4, 016 0;00B0" |sz.ec.anc6 cess Dake resale a eat SER ee Ae lot eiteael thine ;
vasa 50, 155, 783 100, 0000 12, 154 100, 000 133 100. 0
TABLE V.—Tabular statement of the institutions of the world for the education of the deaf and dumb.
| NUMBER OF PUPILS. METHODS OF INSTRUCTION, ‘
|
‘ | Manual. Oral. Combined. Not reported.
; % a a eae ee ee
Country. 3 r 3 , 3 . 3 . S :
Be} £ |3 ‘ z ve} 2138 F 21S £
= Total. Male. Feinale. 3 § & 2 | Ss & a B FA. © 8 a 3
| 2 | 4 i = | 8 r $ | 8 a | 3 | a |3]
= Ss + © & | % w |e!) & | Ss isl) s& ly
| S Rhee ee) we dae bed & | ooh eo ie
| 5 is bie of S Ss 5 wm le S 18 S18 Is
| 4 AAA A A Z A iA A |A\A\|A
i | Australia ............ 2. eeeeee 3 147 82 65 ll 1 14 BW Uitaserlapeedess shay leeesle seabed | peaser 2 133 9
| Austria-Hungary .....-..-..-. 1 1,147 656 454 CA sev fecscts| eeee sf) DT Tpid7 (it ney Beene eee Joessfoasees jee
BoB s 65.5050. .csspaesendes 10 864 489!) BOB] sess. Jcenstisepadfs tenes 5 BO jee |B 625 |...... ts cscldgctes Vc ‘
Brasilbitcsc shri ccaceseearedecs 1 32 BBs. cesees Biljesrlysczas fatus| besser lodce dealer ad oaleonsleiasnbeels 1] 89] 3
| Canala ....00..-.eee eee eee eee 7 803 397 406 84 J. cores st eueidn 1 150 27 56 653 isl ycveneleoss
Denmark 4 326 150 176 41 1 142 15 2 150 264) scxys oe eee 1 34 8 |
BYANCO....0..ceeee ceecsesecees 67 | 3,482 |........ seas $4) 254)... 28 862 17 3 Oo er 18 | 395
Germany ..........-.-+200000- 90 5,608!) 1,042 908 580 G0: OL CDR BBO loos cl ises cecleesaeale castes
Great Britain and Ireland..... 46) 2,650) 1,418 244, 8 958 4 20 4196 16 | 13 1, 356 109 7) 240 25
TRATYviceesivecrescsscesess toe 1,491 815 237 84) 1,405; 227) 1 Bb i
OC) 2 65 37 28 T\ 2 65 T \sevses put lewepes te ad he bky- [Ep ceed neue] avon aalibes
Luxembourg........----.--- P| Die 29 | 15 Id Bi fode [eceeteiscces 1 20 Bi |) vo. [aterbecslessccs}oas, loscondlses
Mexico ....... Seeszeeses |) 30 | 23 7 7) 2 0 Ps sgkeliscodeual tae cilecssltosedendlepavenhuas eases
Netherlands .........2.....2.., 3 465 256 209 H 3 165 oll ee eGehed cuceleQerle ses?
| Now Zealand................. 1 22 13 9 BD iicsidise aps 1 22 See eondedisrenctleaut lyases
NOEWAY 22. cccsccsccoetoseccs 7 283 195 128 M4 6 4 a) 1 59 BT | 2. jeccdse ‘
= | BOPSHERD: 304.003.2098 seeescece 1 8 | 7 1 1 lWdansweles vo . : whic 8| 1
Russia (including Courland |
| and Finland).........-...... | 10 584 363 221 69; 3| 122 10 5 217 26) 2 245 BB een lppeacelees
Spain ............ . Recaeeel a 222 25 97 16 eae, Perzess 7 Re «i a
WIENS: cotskc sick dssiachvoced 17 680 21 250) 7%) 2] 111 9 3 68, 10! 5 924; 96: 7] 1977/2
Switzerland ....... Pry ee 380 18 198 39 |.. on save 11 580 9 ,
| United States..............-- 55 | 7,155 | 4,085 3,070 1| 8] 346 26 12 684 62/35) 6,225 808 )....)....../...
| WOWAY van isuxizcaeiste sis $07 | 26,473 /*10, 751 | 8,545 2, 020 | 2 1,682 120 230 13,240 1,182 | OF | 10,566 bd 87 1,019 | O3

* The reports from France and P'ussia do not indicate the sex of the pupils

| Getman, Ida

78 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCOKS.,

TABLE W.—A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents.

Acheson, Eugene A

Acheson, George W ........ eee cece ee cece eee veeeee
Acheson, Pauline M Are
DIRS Fak ce csencedesscetveresecsucccvoase ves
Acheson, Robert ..............-.--2--- ideaecapleeacace
ATATG; Hattie Movi. is ccs cc secccavecsrovectssccdiccecs
BUON AGRAW ss sccicccestsseedvauceves Beste TEs ees KEES ae sees
AMG) BURG 65 6 55's ic ees geeseweedcedsesde cagelesssqs GOP ep ite atvatenteseageacssb¥ys ee hice -. | 1849 |
| Allen, Mabel H .....................- iSemuap venta ests, OO ssycevccisetexsccscpenesesedediseibaccaca 1881
| SUG; BALD: adic ess eesc sald ecttevedccgeesy feces Oe senssedasecdicrs bierhedaecveecs ¢eqkeen ove 1843
| ATMOlG BAO 556 oss e ise cedesese cs siet New York Institution ............ Nevincuteceeas 1835
| ATMO VRHG: checcccacvecsicddscsssdcseedenraeilseasns WO vsetscssculese sedan’ vecesnsssdedessaninrses 1833
| Atherholt, Colonel Ohio Institution ............. 2... cece eee eee ee 1851
| Ballin, Albert ...... New York Iustitution ...... 1868
| Barnard, Lucretia R American Asylum 1863
| Barnes, Rosa l....... FRESE SSENST ESO No ece seers Western New York Institution. ............ 0. . 1883
| Bayne, Mary E.. PennsylvaniaInstitution 1878
| Belcke, Charles Illinois Institution .............--.....0. cece eee 1879
Berry; Pranols . ....00.scocccveccessseces sae hoeigs New England Industrial School. .............-.. 1888
Bender, Caroline ........... .2 ee. eee ee eee eee New York In titution ............ 02.22.0222 2. 1859
Bennett. Mary L ......6..csceccssecccescoseees Pennsylvania Institution ....... ............--. 1875
| DOG ase sene ss 0ee, stan es coeduseenrteess New York Institution ...............226000-.06- 1882
| Bentz, Anna DeH ..... ......... 0 12 e- eee eee Pennsylvania Institution .......-.-......--. --. 1869
| Bodine, Charles Van W .......-.--...---202-00- New York Institution ..........0c.cceseseee ose 1867
| Brasher, Fanny C ...........00.ee eee ceeeee eens Illinois Institution ......... sipeaesevlselnlekGear 1882
| Brown, Sugan F.............ccccccecsescooee «. | AMerican Asylum.........c.s-cccee coseceecese 1865
| Brown, Thomas..... SV escgeace RTT Ore TT oe os sesaee 1809
| Brown, Thomas L 1851
| Brown, Helen H .......-...-..0 sees eee eee vee seeeee 1855
| Bruner, Harry A... 1876
| Bucklen, Simeon D 1842
| Bucklen, Martha Ann............ceeeseeeeeceee coer: GO .cccsccsecece coccescccccccescecssesecece 1838
| Burgess, W. Taylor ...................0cceeeees West Virginia Institution ...........-.......... 1878
Brin gees- POH DW: ..sscccccsecssocesccscevescvsepfessees DO «eee ccec ee seevee cece ce cccescesees -» 1880
Burt, Harrison A ....... cccccccccescseccecsees New York Institution ........-.-.-..---.22. .. 1863
Butler, Phasbe M .................- ius Spann ee sfacsgee do ....... ve eee eet eee ececeeeceseeeee ne + 1878
| Cairnes, William T ................. 0. . eee eeee Marglaud Boliool ....ccces.pdvesscccsseosses ae 1881
| Opmptelh) Lisate:. 2... .cccc i csccscdsnercecveces Clarke Institution .......... 1877
| Churchill, Anna R 1858
COOR, BUCADOLD. 6.50655 icccevecsesdseeoevonass 1851
{ Cooper, William E 1865)
| Crawford, Josephine L................. 2 cece eee sete OO « oener ecceccseccccccces coneeerccesceces 1879
| CUED ARTO siseicecccesncddctesces ceaveene Amerioan Asylum ....00.cncvecesesereorssee ov | 4878
| GURVER, UOHRs «vince ccesececs: cesccdessernscciegilossese MO .ccccesccncccvcccveseenescisccssneseeces 1882
Culver, Heman M .............. ...- ee cecibepslistane GO. crnccsencesncesen seosessspessesoecece 1881
} AAMT WANIG ED os cccceds casvetcaconcsseccabe New England Industrial School .........-- ses 1882
b DOSDY) TIME res vacesevestscecsscsescesomenves American Asylum .............ccceesseeeeeee 1861
| Diamond, Albort...............200..005 weeeees Le Couteanx St. Mary's Institution. ....... 1867
| DOIGHOFN, AUG IR: 6 occ i ccncroccsesuecdveccness Pennsylvania Institution 1859
H PEB OU, TOIBIGAN, ins ccc ceescdcdccscusuwecccs Tilinots Tnstittion, ..... cece ccccccscccseesesas 1867
WURte; COPOHHe 00... .ccccccccccescseese Neeihes New York Institution ............4....4..00.2, 1855
Dupee, Franklin L................... .... Oral Branch Penn Institution... ............ 1882
| Edwards, Walter D ..............ccccccceeenees Illinois Institution...............- - ‘ 1864
MC WATOG; PIRES TEs 6 abo db cdecejayandsnedess f ESC KIER Vilice SERENE HES VEN VENT bb nNGeas -+ 1867
| Felton, John ........ Wisconsin Institution ...... > Regus sees) 1869
Genet, William F New York Institution ....................2...2., 1850
POGIG TUTIOY Wns ce seccavarsaccanccsecssces Columbia Institution ............ setsiccicasss:| Sl

New York Institution ............cccescesseees

3
Name. Where educated. 8
é&
e
Acheson, Charles ......-..--.-..0e-eeceeeeee ees American Asylum ......... CCEP ERR eee 1864

Acheson, Dutee W..... . New England Industrial School .............-.. 1881

Remarks,

Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Do. |
Do. |
Do. |
Do.
Do. |
Do. |
Do. |
Do. |
Father a deaf-mute.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Father a deaf-mute.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Father partially deaf. ‘

Both parents deaf-mutes,
Do,
Do.
Both par. -ts “hard of hear-
ing.
Do.
Father a deaf-mute,
Do.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Mother somewhat denf.

”

Father a deaf-mute.
Do.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Mother partially deaf..
Father deaf in one ear,
Bovh parents deaf-mutes,
Mother partially deaf.
Father * hard of hearing.”
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Both parents slightly deaf.
Mother somewhat deaf.
Both parents deaf-mutes,
Do.
Do.
Do,
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Father deaf in one ear.
Mother slightly deat.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Mother a deafsmute,
Both parents deat-mutes,
To,
Do.

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 79

TABLE W.—A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents—Continued.

Name.

Gloyne, Mary... 2.0. cccvccccscccccccsessevses
Goodness, Alex ........-...0002 eee ee cee e ee cee
Hahn, Maximilian ..

| Hall, William Franklin

ROMY BAUM Ab caexiseicccceecec andes sereescceecce | Western New Y vk Institution

| Minnegota School

Hennricks, Henry

Hine, James

Hines, W'lliam W
Hord, Edwin

Hord, Mary E

Howell, Wallace F......
Howell, William L

Housel, Helen Estelle ............--........---

Jones, Florence Harriet
| Kershner, John M
Kershner, Emma R.......
Kindred, Maria J
Kindred, Elizabeth .

| Kingsley, Isabella ..

| Koffman, Abey
Koffman, Samuel

| Koffman, Lewis.....
Laird, James F

Laird, Elizabeth I

| Laister, Eleanor Jane....
| Lancaster, Lucas C
Lloyd, John, jr
Lovejoy, Benjamin
Lovejoy, Hartwell
Lovejoy, Sarah

Lovejoy, Emma
Lovejoy, Erastus
Lovejoy, Abigail
Lovejoy, Lydia A

| Lovejoy, Hattie M
Lovejoy, Roscoe P ...
Marsh, Catharine B

| Marsh, Paulina N

| Marsh, Jonathan F

Marshall, George W .........-....--.-..-- mia

| Marshall, Benjamin F
Marshall, Edith H
Marshall, Gilbert F
Marshall, Leslie G ...
Mayhew, Benjamin ...............--.......
Mayhew, Jared
Mayo, Hawes ...-... Gos <caveesaucness
| McClave, Robert... .............---
| McClurg, Drucilla H.............
| McGregor, Bessie
| McLaughlin, Amanda FaUbiodse ssekb<Cetee
| Meacham, Mey O. ............eeeee secu ee
| Meacham, (7 «rcellia A
Meacham, George
Meacham, Allen B
Meade, Margaret é
Metrash, Robert L.G.............. :
Munson, Lizzie
Ormsby, Edward EB
Park, James M
Di. cseee. ‘

Where educated.

.| New York Institution

Wisconsin Institution
New York Institution

American Asylumn........-2+-..0206- ’

| Ohio Institution

1865
1868

1860
1860

| American A sylim

New York Institution

New England Industrial School

| American Asylum................ Ris naes Seaetee

1860

1863

1866

1879

1879

1882

1858

1864

1865

Oluo Institution 1865

Pennsylvania Institution -. «| 1877

Ohio Institution ............ 22... eee ee cocres| 1888
Wostern New York institution . 1876
American Asylum...- 1866
1866
1868
1872
1873
American Asylum i872
New York Institution : 1879
New York Institution . -. 1870
Columbia Institution bi besepersees isvl
Ohio Institution ................. 1864

Remarks,

Mother ‘‘hard of hearing.”
Father a deaf-mute.
Father partially deaf.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Mother a deat-mute.
Father very deaf.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Father a deat-mute.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Both parents deaf-mutes,
Do.
Do.
Do.
Father a deaf-mute.
Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Father ‘hard of hearing.”
Do.
Do.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Do.
Father a deaf-mute.
Mother deaf in one ear.

‘Father deaf from old age.”
Father a deaf-mute.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do,

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.
Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Both parents deaf-mutes,

Do.

Do.

Do.
Mother a deaf-mute. .

Do.

Do.
Both parents deaf-pyutes
Mother very hard of hearing.
Both parents deat-niutes.
Mother partially deaf (recent).
Mother ‘hard of hearing.”
Both parents deafsnutes,

Do.

80

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

TABLE W.—A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents—Continued.

$ Name.

Bier TOR We. ieclecsedsini esscisebarsodaryeeuceee
Place, Larissa..... .-...
Pimm, Joshua R........

Pimm, Rachel A. ........-.-.

Pimm, Martha .........-

Pimm, Charles Augustus

Purvis, James H ........
Purvis, Amanda J ......

Where educated,

Purvis, Kate L.......cccccc esc ee see cccreceesees Jreeeee

| Purvis, Mary .......--..
Purvis, Mary A .........

Purvis, Timothy
Purvis, James M
Riggs, Charles A..
Ramsey, Ann E.........
Redmond, Henry......-.-

*

Richardson, George E........---

ta eavcahegaediog aasee ed .-- | Amerier” Asylum

Pennsylvania Institution

New York Institution

Clarke Institution ......

Risley, Luman L........... 202. eeeeeeeeeseerees New York Institution ..............0.....0-004.
Risley, Charles E ....... 2... eee ee eee eee eee lene eee OO sis cis Sis catases veseseoesssecepeseqenes
Roberts, John James. ..........-. 020020 ee ee eels weee OG Sacks Vanccwccetinheesisegiecceshreens ‘
Rogera, Tau LT 5.000. cccrevsceveccsvveceossces | South Carolina Institution

Rogers, William H

Rogers, David § ........-ceceresesccsccccecscoelescess OD .25 cetiepeseceees

Rogers, Clara A. ....c.c.ccccccctccccccwoccvees ievens do
Rogers, Nettie S., daughter of Wm. H. Rogers.|......
Sawhill, Collins S .......

Sawhill, Jesse U .....

Sawhill, William L.... 02.2. cece eee eee cee eee

Sawhiil, Lavinia A
Schroeder, Anthony
Scove}, Harriet E

-.do...

Columbia Institution

South Carolina Institution ......-..- ;

Ohio Institution

Pennsylvania —.ustitution
Ohio Institution ........

Columbia Instituuon

Ohio Institution

BeoVel) SOV ON nok ad. iss scetccceedisecsecaslssoess

Scovel, Olive .......--. A
Shannon, William.......

Skelvy, FOWM. 1.2 oss ck peccecssccssioe seseoelecsoes

Stevenson, Charles W...

Stevensor, Georgiana ..........--. .... eee eee

Stiles, Penniah Anna ...
Stratton, Sarah C .......

Stratton, James Wells . .
Straw, Mary .....-
Suart, Emma M .....
Suart, Mabel C.

| Sutton, Ross P .. ......

Maryland School. ....-..
Columbia Institution
New York Institution
Pennsylvania Institution

New York Institution
Ohio Institution

Obto Institution ....

1 BWett Dorata EL <.ssccccscsvareecssovesvensasse American Asylum ........2. c20. ceee eee een ees
Swett, Charlotte EB ...... 2.00 62 cee ee eee cee UDiS eeaensessey cast ecdie eh Fd6kG sm Dene eas
SWOtt, Mitohel ........cccscccocsccsccecsseveess QO si soscsiveccdasacbaresseceaess coseesips

| Swett, Lucy Maria... ......... 2.0... cence eeeeee Clarke Inatitution ........0..0::cescracrscccence

| Sweet, Margaret S ..........2..cccs see cos cee American ASYlUM ...cccc ees ces eeeeeseereneeee

| Tate, Margaret ; aay Missouri Institution ........ Maer e:

1 TRYIORy ANNA RRs voce. scale cactace ssc ules Coos} AMOrlOan ASYINM . ccsccccscicceseccsserevovess

| Townsend, Albert M ....... Tilinois Inietitution.ccccascccsccessesesvcccnccess
DOLWSY, LUCY Me .. cc csecrcscccsceceseeccescees| AMOMORD ASYVIUM cecccacecrescsoacssecescercess

Van Kirk, Joseph S..

Pennsylvagia Institution

1876
1863
1858

1861 |
1864 |
1867 |
1865 |

1865

1870 |
1872 |
1871 |

1872
1880
1878
1849

1883 |
| 1880

1856
1870
1877

| 1855 |

1858
1860
1868
1867
1869
1880
1878
1871

869
1870
1878
1871
1873
1876
1877
1818
18388
1838
1870
1855
1863
1868
1863
1868
1857
1874
1869
1883
1883
1883
1863
1872
1878
1882

1875 |

1870
1851
1873
1864
1856

(1) |

13
12

15

1
|

|
|
|
|

| Both parents deaf-mutes.

|
}
|

Remarks,

Father a deat-mute.

Both pirents deaf-mutes.

Do,
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Mother partially deaf.

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do,
Father deaf in oue ear.

Both parents deat-mutes,

Do.
Do.
Do:

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.
Father very deaf.
Father a deaf-mute.

Do.

Do.

Mother ‘‘hard of hearing.”

Mother becoming deaf.

Both parents deat-mutes.

Do.

Do.
Father a little deaf.
Mother a deaf-mute.

Both parenta deaf-mutes.

Father a deaf-mute.

Motker partially deaf.

| Both parents deaf-mutes.

|
|

Do.

Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Mother a deaf-mute,
Do.

Both parorts deaf-mutes.

Do.
Do,

THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE,

TABLE W.—A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents—Continued.

|
|
!
|
!
|

] eri
Name, | Where educated. | gs | :
| | 48 | %
| eee i
Van Kirk, John ...............000 ceeeeeeeeees | Pennsylvania Institution.............0..-e.e0e: 1850 11
Van Kirk, Charles H .......... eeevienccic [eseses do 11
| Vaughn, Emily W ..............-0-eee00e | Tllinois Institution | 9
Watson, Frederick W ..| California Institution 15
Webster, Joseph............ 0. .ceeeceececeeeee New York Institution 2

Wells, Anna EB ........ccscccccsccssccrscccenes | Illinois Institution............e.-22ccee0ceeseees
Wells, Helen D ............ cscccccecersenseees Maryland School. ...........-02..2-seeeeseeseee
West, Rebecca T .......... 22s s ee eeeeeeeee eens | American Asylum ............0..-2. 00 eee ee ee ee |

West, George
West, Benjamin D
West, Deidama J .

Wildfang, Daniol ...............eseceeeeee cee Wisconsin Institution
Wildfang, Addie ..... Seerebeersesarecedsvarchelrances AO cvweesehaveecasinabeteassuenboacedercres 1883 | 8
Williams, Laura .............0.. cece eee e eee cee New York Institution .......... 02. see. eee eee 1833 | 12

Wiiliams, Elizabeth 1846 12

Williams, Harriet. ............ 22-2 -eeeeeeeeeeee teers 1850 | 12 |
Weidt, William ............... 2. eee ee ere ee eeee 3 18 |

Weidt, A ..... | 11
Weidt, Annie | 8]
Wise, George A................-- gtbseerisxveus New England Industrial School ...........-.--. 1881 | 1l
WASO LOEWE: scscssacceet crcesscecceeseesasreeslsonsne’ Di Siageevieees preservice bes iv epine ete eer eead 1881 | 8 |
Wolpert, David H ...........2. 000s. ceeeeeee eee | Colorado Institution .............2...02 0s cece eee 18747
Woolever, Margaret Ann ........-......-...4-- New York Institution ............-..-...020005 1863 12
Worcester, Ira E. ......... 2.2 eee cece eee eee | American Asylum ...............--- Eeere eee ed 9
Works, William S.. 15
Works, Martha Jane | 13
Works, Mary Ann ...........ccccccesecscccecss|seece GO c-gecaais cccis secs Cecesetsseesesccsagnenes 1851 13
Works, Charles H ..............0csceeseeneeees lV eeates UG Ss che cot hesdsvacacsadessoencegacepoees 1855 (2)*
Whittington, Louis..... ovesereneses Wesessseas | Columbia Institution ................2000 22s: 1869 (2)
Wyncoop, Cora A........ 6. 2 eee eee e eee e ees New York listitution ...............2-.- 2c e eee 1856 (2)
Wyncoop, Frederick ..........---+s2sseeseeees ll
Zimmerman, Alice - 8
Zimmerman, Jennie...... 9

99 A—BELL——11

Remarks,

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do.
Do.

+ Mother a deaf-mute.

Father « deaf-mute,
Mother deaf adult lite.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Mother a deaf-mute.

Do.

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Both parents deaf-mutes.
Father a deaf-mute.

Both parents deaf and dumb.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.
Father deaf in one ear,
Motber partially deaf.

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do,

Do.

Do,

Do.
Mother a deaf-mute.
Father a deaf-mute.
Mother a deaf-mute.

Both parents deaf-mutes.

Do.

81

82

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

TABLE X.—Showing per capita cost for the education of a deaf child in an American institution.

Name of institution.

American Asylum, Hartford, Conn. ....--....-.2++ ceeeeseeeeeseeeee CASRED CORES ETERS |
New York Institution, New York City .....---..--ceeeee cece eee eee eee ete eeneetees

Pennsylvania Institution .........0 2. ee ceee ee cence cece eee eeeeee ee ceeeeeternseeees
Kentucky Institution. ............ 22 ce ceeeee cece ee ce eees cece ew enserereees ceaseeeees|
Ohio Tnatitntion.........ccssncccccccccsceges consessesccccrcccoeedoceseaseccese peceee
Virginia Institution * ........... 6. ee cee eee e eee renee cee e nec ee renee ee eeeeerseeeeeeees
Tndlana Tnatitution: c.cscsecccctseccsscsdescccnccssceestnccvecsccoticetsssesecseues
Tennessee Institution ...........0 cccee cece secret eeee cence cece ne cesses rseeressenes
North Carolina Institution... ........ 2... ees eee ence eee e neces tence eseeeeeeeseneees |
Tilinois Institution ..........cccec ee cece cece cc cece ce teeereceet nee seeereeseeeseccees
Georgia Institution. .......... 00. c cece cece ee cece eee c etree eee neeeeereeeemeeessesecs
South Carolina Institution .... 02... cce cece cece ce ene e eee e ween cnet ce eweeenereeeees
Towa Institution. ........cceee sce e ee ce eee eee eee bade red ddaceolacesgestsicodesoeageres
Wisconsin Institution ............ 0c ec eee ce cece eee e rece erect ees eeeeeteeeee cas eenees
Michigan Institution. ..........cccce cece cecceecee receeecceseccseesrccesseeceseosess!
Mississippi Institution. ..........2.. 02 cece ee eee eee eee ce ee eee ewe ener eee eeeneenens

| Columbia Institution (including the National College) .......------++2seeseeeeeeeee:

Alaina: TWratlti lon: ices 66s cesses ase eee cedscdecesetecscatascccssepesaeeadyoeves
California Institution t .......... ccc cece cece cess ccc cscecceececccgscrccerpenes secces
Missouri Tnstitution . 2.2.02. cccc0. cesses scsccccccccccsecc ccs cccccccescessccceseveces
Kansas Institution ; .......

Le Couteaux St. Mary’s*
Minnesota Institution. ......... 0... cece ccc e eens cece resem weet cert ces ceeeee teenes
Improved Instruction Institution, New York............--+ see eee eee eee ee eee renee
Clarke Institution, Massachusetts. ......... 20... .cecee cece ence eee cencneeweweeeerere
ATRAVOA IOAUGNHON: aces ee ccs Sa aieuse cede cescecicscedapes sadusdiaasiqgvecoesee
Maryland Tnatitutiom . 2.0.0.2... ccc cccccccccccccccc cw cerecs ccc csaccerectscecsecseces
St. Joseph's Inatitution *... 0.2... ccs ccccee cece cece cs cc ences cece nsec scccnsccscccccs
Weat Virginia Institution .....60. cc ccsseeccesccsseccccssesscesasccbcveasce SrevSeese
Oregon Tnistitution. 0... wiesesseeccece te ceccscewdesedcercs uence sebeecsorccccceves |
Colorado Mnatitullows: ses rec sce cece secscceceeeeatsdbiseensedessosavenerdevccccecal
Central New York Institution .......... 2... cece ee cece cece ence eee te eee cwneeeeeeees
Western Pennsylvania Institution |
Western New York Institution ............0 0 cece ee cee ce cece eee e eee ee eeee eee

Number of pupils
Dec. 1, ida

180
481
819
139
432

85
825
103

* Conducted by sisters of charity; no salaries paid.

t Has a blind department.

{ Superintendent's last report states per capita cost $183.05,

| Amount expended
| fur support.

$47, 641
131, 307
71, 301
| 26, 705
79, 612

19, 185

54, 831

24, 369

34, 000
85, 000
14, 241
8, 092
87, 359
40, 888
| 43, 608
10, 610

51, 108

| 12, 500
| 35, 352
| 43, 416
19, 500
| 19, 100
24, 425

| 35, 454
| 25, 487
13, 600
23, 189
| 27, 584
| 19, 472
| 4, 000
7, 579
| 34, 287
| 19, 011
| 27, 901

| 1,171,572

Per capita.
|

$264 67
273 00
223 61

192 12

| 184 28

225 70

165 48

236 59

844 44

167 32

230 00

218 70

194 57

229 14

175 11

149 25

496 64

284 09

827 30

226 40

133 56

148 43

218 03

258 78

| 287 00

230 55

276 02

| 110 35

249 64

153 84

194 33

214 29

182 79

240 52

223+28

|
|

on
fe 8)

2
<
fa
A
<
=
=)
jes)
&
jen)
a
=
>)
ba
=
<2 |
=
=
<
>
=
<

ry)
v}

THE FORMATION OF A DI

TyeIed 8.1894 ¥ ySvaz yu sptdnd FanoL mo [Ie oars Mom 9A ,, (*)
aid Aq yqSnvyz., (p)

-am0N
“OUON
ep

99(2)
“on0N

“em0N
“ou0oN
96
tL
06

¢

F

“euON
te
“ou

te

“ou0N
“9T0N
Ww

“UOPON.LIS

‘UT JO STLUOI U BU Of

Buen you ynq ‘Woy

“BUD FAG BUYTV, ‘ON

er

at

ras

“OTONT
-ou0N
“oUON
“auONT
“ouON

J
i

J
—
a

‘6
o°
IO 'ON
8

ONAIVEAT JO

Bayaya

“a01y

SUBOULY BUA, Fan ‘ON

HOPPR[NOIRAY AT oly

“Ogeut

‘mon
“MyyeUuy Uy sydnd ‘on

nN

| ‘pefoplie Mom doryey

"EgsT ‘Any

| NO\74B JO SLOVO} ‘ONT

(yon
rry.e
(SON

‘BOR
‘Sok
oe @
cow, @
"SOR

(Q) ON
(By ON

joouys
Auyjsuoy podordagy

. Burpear-dy Aq Ayjoqs ysoure yysuV. saquu-tmag,, (9)

‘30D paqiuyy ay2 fO SU0IgN|IBSU? JY7 UL UNO1ZHINDIDAN

,7}0T JO paNUTyWOdsrp oq [[VGs J10H9 ON) J9q}9qMK Farproap o1ojoq Yaeds ay Worjonsys Ut

.Aay9¥I} aind01d you pynog,, (y)

aoqatidoad ‘opddiy yy *¢

Tedrontad ‘ra][N Wy yearg ssiyT

sooo pedrourd “qi -g ‘ardsaqiy “vf

Tedyourad “y “WW ‘STA ML SopRUD

tedround ‘y ‘yy ‘puommevy “9 “H

> yedroniid ‘suss0y “gq Joriey Ssiyy

vot crterseweerereneseerens Ted oUnd ‘Los LIqUuaaty “(I

898T

O83 quapuajzuedns “y "Jy ‘safon “7] ueypeUOLe
€L8L
ESst
1g8T soeseee sess -nedrouLid ‘WPL “WOSULyTT A, WALI Ay
Seats pcs Tedrounid “-q “y ‘uosuyor y ydasor
~-quoprsead “<q -"T1 “Ud ‘epuryley “WA
“quapuojutiodns ‘prog “gs aqor
juapusjuiiadns ‘sutqog "yf
quopuezutimdns ‘s1as0y *¥ “AIT

*Juapuszutied
“ns ‘qoany 9 “y ‘aeq ‘yedrunud “yy ‘eld “-¥ A
“quopuequiiiedus “Py ‘IaTTAg “Ay UO Lr
-* quepuoqutiadns “y “PY ‘uosnd10,4 *1) “Y
quepuajauiedns WY “ey “Wen
“7+ -quaepuojutiodns “19yye AA WOpMON
edroutid “10uu09 ‘Oo “A.
quapuauredns “gq "PT H91T19 DH aya
Tedioatid ‘suno x -f “Ay
Tedyoarid ‘sasoyq “T svmoryy,
quapuoquiiodns ‘uue[y WEIL AY
pedrourid “19][0y *S see
quapuszuriedns Sayy0e “YF ‘Joq Tey, uruvfasg
“so "***> -quapuejutodns ‘9 "yy ‘Aerpnq *O “a
> yediourid ‘10380 unysor

‘aviissyd Juaprsar pus yuapuoyuiodns “Gq "FX
“Uos1UQ U0ypAVD ‘pedrouid “gq ‘yy ‘400g S1M97] OvUs]
correseees edromtid ‘y “JX ‘SURI AL (Or

qediouuid ‘ayang euuy Saeyq 10)815
quopuazuiiodns Sunor ‘yoyo a “T 4)

woyUpWoyy

“19ITYO IAI}NIaK? Jory

*potordina qeay

| aoyouey

G88E PUR Ost UL osTy,, (4)
OUT] Jaeseid 07 29g] Woay puv ‘1vak oO OFST fIZST-RIRT ‘pe tojduig,, (9)

6981
693T
6981
g98T
S98f
LORT
LOST
£981
e98l
e981
09st
0981
Ls8t
Lest
981
ecst

bas) &
Gost
oeeal
Tes
GFL
9F8T
9F8T
Fral
ctST
FFI
Gest
6c8I
Eos
Ost

Bist
LI8T

jo ovq

‘Saiasdo

|---mm0g ‘saan osszy |

ssvyy ‘uwoysog

agen ‘eqeug

DW ‘S319 Yoepede

“SEV 9ee eT T

~-ssrypq ‘aojdaeqy10N

“" RN ‘HIOK MON

“UUTyY ‘3[oeqTieg

ACN OPH

“-"* suLy ‘eTIRIO
ttre reg Sapoysog: |
wrrrrt oo Rpy ‘Bpepeyey ;

“7h Q'g ‘MoPsUTGSE MA

* sUxey ‘TUnsny

sr eeeees sry ‘uosyour

““BMOT ‘Syn [louneD

QOuA UNL
ST AA ‘OBAR[ACT
VT ‘vsnoy woz
on Moy |
*g Suauidg sepap
vy ‘Sands org |
I ‘Pttsuosyov re
ON “WS pope
uuay, ‘e[[fAxouy
“> > puy ‘sijodvaripuy
vA ‘TOJUNUS
orgg ‘snqmnjog
corre ero Ly ‘oypLaueg

“oe ‘erqdpepupd |

“ACN ‘NI0X MON

‘SISO WOpUryse Ay |
uU0D ‘plo0jsqseTT |

“MOT]VIO'T

,peydnsseyar oar, (f)

, }Uepxe 90s OF ,, (4)
SI-LORT ‘KAvaN ¢ JO [VAIPINT,,

Jooqog amo 8,apddyiy
JHOlag auVy_ 90820
OINYIBSay KYSBIGAN
Joos purl Laivxy
14V

OLN Say VIOSUOTT

>> MOTgNpISUT 6, LuvP_ “YS x[Ne}NOED aT

GOLNysSAy suse y
TWOTIWITSUY VITAOZIRD
wornyysay BuNgryy
WONNAYSUT BIQUEN|O?D
sere unpAsy SEXO TD,
gorpnyyeay rddyssyssr yy
>=" "GOI MISUT VAOT

aonnyysuy a
WOUPDITISUT WISMOIST A
UoOTPD PLIST] VIVISMO'T

TOT YYSUT LIMOSst py

MON NIYSAT Valpouvsy YIREg
WOIWNZNSUT BIF.LOGD

MOTOR YSU] Sour]
UOIN}YSUY VAIPOIVD YON
pi Troqosg Sexsou uoL

-- MOWPD}LYSU] VULIpAy
UONNIYSUY BINTSIT A
WOTZNAISAT O1GO
worynyysuy AyonqUey

- wor Nyysuy vines {saueg

doTNNSAy YsoOR MON
wun {ey Uronewy

OUlU NT

So Buryons, oy) brrusa0ueo yuauapmys Loynquy,— XK AIAVI,

yee
(v)

ce
Ig
0g
6c
86

MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

84

. WOTZRIPVe1 UT qoveds Jo opeur st asn o[QVJOpIsMOd ‘s1apvar-dr] M|z BYWAY
Tea Wes OM Te qyLM A]per1o osiaad09 og ‘saynu-tutag,, (4)

pasordarg (y)
«, UONVULIOJUT ayIUyep Jeyliny ON ,, (p)

“om0N “oTO NT “eT0N Te “oUON () "ON
i) ag 988 | 166‘T Zee ‘8 2 | SPR iapeariae dead fog
09 | 09 09 L
| “ou0NT ano 61 ‘omuON te *|--
“om0ON “Om0ON ve § omON Se a ee
tera IEE Sree tenis ee ga eae (s) “SOX
¢ T 9 6r : “Sox |
“9u0Ny “oO N “aTON WF “MON [ooo tte
“omoN Te 1% 1@ é $9 X
“oT0N OF OF oF | F $oX
“aa0x 0g 0€ 08 £ “SOX
iz “ou0N 3 oP 3 sox
“emo N €& €& ee $ “BOX
Ost (a) | ¢ cat 9eL * *saX
L 9 €l | sor T ‘sox |
“eu0N “m0 NN “amo N 9% SE Sh
¢ 06 cs £91 T “S9X
re Se (p) if Sox
‘oa0N ot or or T X
¢ P4 Le; 1 “am0N 2 oct =<
“OUON oF OF OF £ “BOX
“auTON “a0 “ONT eI “eWONT [---7°77 7"
“ou0oN | “emoN “OO NN £s Sy. ey aS bes
“ation | “oT0N “OTIO NT 99 “ATION, (qQyron
#1 | ey 63(D) 1S 9 "8a
|
|
Zz z a Zz =Z I
259 > => > => =
Sef.t Ss =s 1 Sa. =
Sean f= =s s =e 3
roe zis 2S a= S= zz
a z= a= =F “5 om
-~os_ == == ES os aan
=o o> zR Fs ge 23
ats == =f = 3> z
oc> Se aoe z z= 3
Zs “3 S2 = 2S =
PRs = = 2s z

*ponutu0g—eeetl ‘hvyy ‘saynyg panup

4 1yoVZ Savey & puv pediounud Aq yaSney,., (9)

SBI ‘PUNE pasop joourg,, (Sf)
.savat om <[0Q,, (9)

2g 7 auapisaad “qvyT “Ud ‘puryiwyy “Wa | F98T
ns ad Dataset d Os1eY) Ul TayIVA} ‘Wolsey wu ssi SST
monte -pirecewrebworse sete juapaajutiodns ‘uosdutg some | Ogst
SSSI ema ah aa a tk ee Tedrouand ‘zspqso0y “Fy qoorr | ORL
OL8T OTe Vee ot the es edpurid ‘Sosy WV “Sayt | LLST
GONE fie te sh Juopuaquriadns ‘yas “gq UIVITT AL 8L8I
Seat bri tae a ate aro jedrnud “yg ‘aosdurg*y-q = 881
SPOe aA re, ee ee jedrouud ‘iemyjms wepy — 8L8t
LEE OF ge ee ey Tedyourid ‘ddeay yoreparg | L281
Lest ccc pedpund ‘unsny *y ourrmeyivy ssypg L181
9I8T * > yedponuid “rasseaq sapieqg “aey «ORT
DISE Eraser redronid ‘mozaeg "y waT[sT SSI | OLRT
BERT Pere eee Tedvouuid 4yaaraysa ay °Z—OLST
eee SS ---"yedpound “q “qq ‘au seuoyy, | 9281
capa = bet marca strccrcescceeseroees redrourtid ‘pooay “WSLS
Lal Tediound ‘y -g ‘aos -g preapy CLT
ZRET --yudouud “wp ‘fiamg wed | CLs
yo coal (coca aaet aia tai pap a ts ac JoOyove} ‘YS ArePL SSI FBT
“yapueltt

= emer -odns ‘Xpounay “yf fediound ‘Surmmoqg “mM “ds FL8T
Loe aS ep LT aE jedrourid ‘Sq a‘ Elst
7 -quopuoyniiadns “yy ‘aos0y_ “TLS
pee ate) iit eld ee at tl chee jedionnad 4ysiry “gq “Ae (OLR
pO ge einer cea ese Ree SESS tedroarid “FFT ‘PACD “OL OLST
OIVE:. \S2as seas quapusajatiedns ‘urs10yy “gq Livp_ SSPE GOST
> S

= = “LOIYJO VAIFNVIXI JOD EB

Adotpoway

---" O-q ‘aogsarqeem [----** orto rome eFaTIOD [euoyeVN |
Bp sort ee gan hete ear bgt eee 8$94zVIG pou oT} UL suOTyNzIyVSTT
Resse eq ‘eydppeiyg |-wornqysuy eiueap{snueg qouvrg [v1
ras HVC ‘STW XNOIG |r es weet eee yOoyNS voyUq
Shen sects, vq ‘woyMVINg |---77- +7277 ------ -Jooyag Au uoyUEIIg

seek ory ‘oponbaepy | TONR[NILY JO [00qIg |
-- ssuqy ‘Apeaog \. “> POONIS [VLYsupUy pueppag Mae
wesEes oy, ‘stnory yureg | -++-+ +++ ->----- poomog Auq smory yning

Sens STAY ‘ooynuaptpy |ot0+ 20-77 --- -oyNINsUy [worsojouogg |
sSrecrce: PIV SsouNTyeR | wt tre ooyag 8.ddewy -rpy
Saree I ‘UY ‘eouspra0clrg [reeceteceeee “*7""""T9O4OS puR[sy epoyry
"7" SEMA ‘StoURL yuIEg [on oo oo OFIYSUT OPOUIVH S$ WYO IS
eorrrese oy ‘purpaog |o-- 77-77 + 777+ pooyag Leq purpa0cg
apeaes KN ‘doysayqooy |---* 7" WOINNAYSUT YIOX MON W19}s9 AA
ee es: Bq ‘YI*AY omy, |" -*-uoTNg sy vravay{sune, 110}89 AV
Se OIgQ ‘YeautaMigQ -7- 777777787 -Jooyag Avg NvUUIOUID
Jreeeeeee NONNYSHYT YIOX MON [V.ayWD
“77 + gfooyos Lug odvoup9
ee aa che aaa ae jooqos Avg ong

oTON ‘sBuridg opv.0jop

“"**-9yNgQIYSUT Oprsojpog

one “** WOUpy ‘SLIIONN ort MOTNNANSUT UvssqyN’yT “Ag

Sosisiss PIC ‘some Poe2O[OH logy TOTNNAYSAT

weer eate= Ba1Q ‘uraywg «3-7 -* teesee ects eeeeeeee JOORIS UOFeIQ

resinee vA (M ‘Aommoyy (-- 77777777 * TOTQNINSUT VIUIsATA 1SA AL

ogo KN ‘meqpaog ort ommaNsuy Ss .ydosor 3
*d0ryn00'y “OTUUNT

ayy fo sworgnpr;sUr ay? UL UONMRAIQAD fo Buryona, ay? Gurusv0U0) Quamagy}s Anj)nNqvT,—' K ATAVI,

*9SaT[09 9} JO YIOM JVM BISI] TILA VIMeIoj19}UL JO esSnvIeq panurydoosip,, ‘erval F 10 ¢ 10
,UONINIPSUL 10 SUBIUT B SE UON[NIIe JO opvul osn [worjovad Gary [ITM [T¥,, (2)
‘eMOp YOM UOTBNINIE oy} 07 9oIYSNf Op 07 40M UaES soINSy osaqy, (>)

cg

APPENDIX Z.

The following table, combining all the cases of marriage recorded in Tables A to J, was sub-
mitted to Prof. Simon Newcomb for his opinion regarding the number of congenital deaf-inutes
who had married congenital deaf-mutes. The Reports of the American Asylum and Illinois Insti-
tution give no information bearing on this point; but it seemed possible to determine the proba-
bilities from the data given in the table, especially as the intermarriages, in a large proportion of
cases, undoubtedly occurred between deaf-mutes who had been educated in the same Institution,
and who were therefore both included in the table:

Deaf-mutes stated to have marvied,
but who are not recorded to have
married deaf-mutes,

| Deaf-mutes who are recorded to
have married deaf-inutes,

Males. | Females. | Total. Males. Females. Total.
|

|
Cause of deafuess, |
|
|
|

Congenital ....... Sods 0s ees coececoves 150 | 148 298 25 62
Non-congenital 179 | 331 ; 27 85
Not stated | 14 25 15

Total | yy j 162

The main question proposed was this: Of the congenital deaf-mutes who are recorded to have
married deaf-mutes, what proportion have married congenital deaf-mutes ?
Professor Newcomb has been kind enough to send the following letters in reply to the query:

NAUTICAL ALMANAC Orrice, NAVY DEPARTMENT,
Washington, D. C., May 20, 1884.
DraR Mr. BELL: Although the question you ask seems to admit of a satisfactory answer, I notice a singular
defect in the statistical table. It contains not a single case of a deaf-mute being reported as having married a hearing
person. If this is an accidental omission in making the copy for you it ought to be corrected, If there is really no
such record the case is very singular.” It would look as if the parties were ashamed to state that they had married
hearing persons, or the recorders had rejected all such cases,

The main question you ask cau, I think, be answered by the theory of probabilities. Your table, if I understand
it correctly, shows that out of 629 persons in the institution (of whom 329 were males and 300 females) a little less
than one-half (298) were congenital deaf-mutes. Now, I see no reason for supposing that the persons whom they
married would be divided in any essentially different proportion between the two classes,

It is true that could we learn from the census tables how the entire deaf of the country of marriageable ages, say,
between the ages of twenty and thirty, are divided between the two classes, our conclusions might be modified. If,
for example, it should be found that of the total number of deaf alluded to only one-third were congenital cases, we

*Only eleven deaf-mutes were specifically stated to have married hearing persons, and 151 were recorded

simply as ‘‘ married.”
85

86 MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SOIENOES.

might be allowed to suppose that the marriages reported were divided according to this ratio, rather than according
to the approximate ratio of equality found in the asylum, But we should consider that this surplus of non-con-
genital deaf would indicate a class who associate principally with hearing persons, and who would, therefore, be less
likely to marry deaf-mutes than others would. I think, therefore, that under the circumstances, we should regard
the ratio given by statistics of the institution as the most probable one, Of course the reason for this is strengthened
if, as you intimate, a large proportion of the statistics may be mutual, Allowing for a probable slight tendency of the
two vlasses congenital and non-congenital to choose each other, I think the most probable conclusion would be this:

Of the congenital deaf one-half married congenital and one-half non-congenital deat.

Of the non-congenital three-sevenths married congenital deaf and four-sevenths non-congenital deaf.

And I consider these results sufficiently probable to form the basis of conclusions in cases where slight changes
in the numbers would not change the general result.

If you wish your table returned please inform me.

Yours, very truly, a, NEWCOMB.

WASHINGTON, D, C., May 26, 1884.
Dear Mr. BELL: The remarkable agreement between the ratio of congenital and non-congenital cases in the
census reports, and in the numbers married, affords a strong confirmation of the probable soundness of the conclusion

Lindicated to you. The small discrepancy to which you allude probably arose from the twenty-five ‘ not stated”
cases. I return you the tables.

Yours, very truly, g. NEwoOlRD